HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.08 Impact Analysis
SPRING VALLEY RANCH
IMPACT ANALYSIS
May 28, 2024
Prepared For
Community Development Department
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
and
9875 N. Tuhaye Park Drive
Kamas, UT 84036
Prepared By
WESTERN BIONOMICS INC.
Natural Resource Management Services
31040 Willow Lane • Steamboat Springs, CO 80487
Ph: 970-846-8223 • kscolfer@westernbionomics.com
Page | i
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
Contents
INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................. 1
CONCEPTUAL PLAN ...................................................................................................................................... 1
ADJACENT LAND USE ................................................................................................................................... 2
SITE FEATURES .............................................................................................................................................. 2
4.1 HIGHER ELEVATION PLATEAU ............................................................................................................................. 2
4.2 MIDDLE ELEVATION SLOPES AND BENCHES ........................................................................................................ 4
4.3 LANDIS CREEK AND MINOR EPHEMERAL GULCHES ............................................................................................ 4
EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................................................................................................................... 5
5.1 SOIL CHARACTERISTICS ....................................................................................................................................... 5
5.2 GEOLOGY AND HAZARD ...................................................................................................................................... 7
5.2.1 Bedrock Units ........................................................................................................................................ 8
5.2.1 Surficial Deposits ................................................................................................................................... 8
5.3 GROUNDWATER AND AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS ............................................................................................ 11
5.3.1 Physical Characteristics ...................................................................................................................... 11
5.3.2 Aquifer Recharge ................................................................................................................................. 14
5.3.3 Anticipated Diversions and Depletions................................................................................................ 14
5.3.4 Total Spring Valley Aquifer Demands ................................................................................................. 15
5.3.5 Legal Water Supply .............................................................................................................................. 15
5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL .............................................................................................................................................. 16
5.4.1 Wildlife ................................................................................................................................................. 16
5.4.2 Wetlands .............................................................................................................................................. 21
5.4.3 Wildfire ................................................................................................................................................ 23
IMPACT ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................................................... 24
6.1 SOILS ................................................................................................................................................................. 24
6.2 GEOLOGY AND HAZARD .................................................................................................................................... 24
6.3 GROUNDWATER AND AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS ............................................................................................ 27
6.3.1 Impact Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 27
6.3.2 Legal Water Supply .............................................................................................................................. 27
6.4 ENVIRONMENTAL .............................................................................................................................................. 27
6.4.1 Wildlife ................................................................................................................................................. 27
6.4.2 Wetlands .............................................................................................................................................. 31
6.4.3 Wildfire ................................................................................................................................................ 31
APPENDIX A – AQUATIC RESOURCE DELINEATION REPORT
APPENDIX B – WILDLIFE BASELINE CONDITIONS AND MITIGATION PLAN
Page | ii
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
Figures
FIGURE 1. SPRING VALLEY RANCH CONCEPTUAL PLAN ................................................................ 3
FIGURE 2. SPRING VALLEY RANCH SOIL MAP UNITS ......................................................................... 6
FIGURE 3. GEOLOGIC MAP – SOUTH ........................................................................................................ 9
FIGURE 4. GEOLOGIC MAP – NORTH ...................................................................................................... 10
FIGURE 5. MAP OF SPRING VALLEY HYDROLOGIC SYSTEM ......................................................... 12
FIGURE 6. ELK HABITAT ............................................................................................................................. 18
FIGURE 7. MULE DEER HABITAT ............................................................................................................. 20
FIGURE 8. WETLAND MAP .......................................................................................................................... 22
FIGURE 9. GEOLOGIC HAZARD MAP – SOUTH .................................................................................... 25
FIGURE 10. GEOLOGIC HAZARD MAP - NORTH .................................................................................... 26
Page | iii
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
Technical Reports and Supporting Documents Reviewed
Wildlife Impact Assessment Report for Spring Valley Ranch Property. Prepared by Timothy G. Baumann,
Western Consulting Group. 1998.
Spring Valley Ranch Cultural Resource Status Review. November 3, 1999. Prepared by Western Cultural
Resource Management, Inc.
Engineering Consultation, Preliminary Slope Stability Analyses, Wilderness Cabin Area, Spring Valley Ranch.
Bowden, W.L., CTL/Thompson, Glenwood Springs, CO. February 24, 2000.
Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Spring Valley Ranch PUD. Bowden, W.L., CTL/Thompson, Glenwood
Springs, CO. March 10, 2000
Geologic Evaluation Spring Valley Ranch PUD. Bowden, W.L., Prepared by CTL/Thompson, Glenwood Springs,
CO. March 13, 2000.
Geologic and Geotechnical Consultation, Two Water Tank Sites, Spring Valley Ranch PUD. Prepared by
Bowden, W.L., CTL/Thompson, Glenwood Springs, CO. March 14, 2000.
Engineering Consultation, Slope Stability Analyses, Proposed Roads, Spring Valley Ranch. Kellogg, J.D.,
CTL/Thompson, Glenwood Springs, CO. November 9, 2000.
Spring Valley Ranch PUD Water Requirements, Water Resources, and Spring Valley Area Water Balance.
Prepared by Wright Water Engineers, Glenwood Springs, CO. March 2, 2000
The Spring Valley Hydrologic System. Prepared by Jerome Gamba & Associates, Inc., Glenwood Springs, CO.
March 10, 2000.
Wildlife Use, Impacts, and Mitigation, Spring Valley Ranch PUD. Prepared by Allen Crocket, Shepherd Miller,
Inc. March 10, 2000.
Raptor Nesting Survey Requirements, Spring Valley Ranch Project. Prepared by Allen Crockett, Walsh
Environmental, Boulder, CO. October 27, 2000.
Revisions to CDOW Wildlife Resource Information System Mapping, Spring Valley Ranch. Prepared by Allen
Crockett, Walsh Environmental, Boulder, CO. November 30, 2000.
Wetland Delineation for Spring Valley Ranch, US Army Corps File Number 199875502. Prepared by Blair
Leisure, Worley Parsons Komex, Golden, CO. July 11, 2006.
Wildlife Assessment Report for the Spring Valley Ranch. March 2007. Prepared by Eric Pettersen, Rocky
Mountain Ecological Services, Inc. Redstone, CO.
Weed Management Plan, Spring Valley Ranch PUD, Garfield County, Colorado. January 18, 2022. Prepared
by Eric Pettersen, SGM, Glenwood Springs, CO
Wetland Memo. February 15, 2022. Prepared by Eric Pettersen, SGM, Glenwood Springs, CO
Wildfire Mitigation Report, Spring Valley Ranch LLC, 2023 Update. February 2023. Prepared by White River
Fire Consulting, Berthoud, CO.
Spring Valley Ranch Wildlife Baseline Report & Mitigation Plan. Prepared by Kelly Colfer, Western Bionomics,
Inc., Steamboat Springs, CO. May 20, 2024.
Spring Valley Ranch Aquatic Resource Delineation Report. Prepared by Kelly Colfer, Western Bionomics, Inc.,
Steamboat Springs, CO. January 11, 2023.
Geologic Evaluation Spring Valley Ranch. Prepared by Kellogg, J.D., CTL/Thompson, Glenwood Springs, CO.
February 23, 2023
Response to CO Geological Survey Comments. Prepared by Kellogg, J.D., CTL/Thompson, Glenwood Springs,
CO. May 17, 2024.
Spring Valley Aquifer Sustainability Study. Prepared by Erion, Michael J. and Wendy Ryan. Colorado River
Engineering, Rifle, CO. April 11, 2024.
Page | 1
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the impact analysis for proposed development at Spring Valley Ranch, as required by
the Garfield County Land Use and Development Code Article 4-203[G] (Garfield County 2013). This
document describes the existing conditions and the potential changes created by the project for specific
resources, including:
1) Adjacent Land Use
2) Site Features
3) Soil Characteristics
4) Geology and Hazard
5) Groundwater and Aquifer Recharge Areas
6) Environmental Impacts, and
7) Nuisance Impacts
The Impact Analysis includes a complete description of how the Applicant will ensure that impacts will be
mitigated and standards will be satisfied.
Spring Valley Ranch (SVR) is located southeast of Glenwood Springs in unincorporated Garfield County.
The Ranch occupies 5908.43± acres in T6N, R88W, portions of Sections 14-16, 20-23, 26-29, & 32-34, at
39.516383°, -107.215993°. The property is comprised of 4 Garfield County parcels, identified as PINs
218720100168, 218716100169, 218733100152, & 218726200168. Elevation ranges from 6893’ MSL in
the lower elevation pasturelands, up to 9460’ MSL at the northern property boundary atop the southern
flank of Glenwood Canyon.
The parcel drains to the south predominately by Landis Creek but also by an unnamed perennial steam that
disappears into the ground prior to leaving the southern property boundary. Vegetation cover types
dominating the property include irrigated pasture grasses, herbaceous emergent wetland, sagebrush
shrubland, mountain shrubland, Gambel oak woodland, mountain grassland, aspen forest, mixed conifer
forest, and riparian shrubland along portions of Landis Creek.
The property has been subject to at least two prior development proposals, neither of which ever reached
fruition. Consequently, natural resource values have been well-documented over the years. The reports
referenced and summarized in this impact analysis are displayed on the previous page (page iii). These
reports all addressed the baseline conditions of the property, potential impacts to their respective resources,
and recommended mitigation measures to accompany the development plans. These reports all provide
extensive details, are incorporated by reference, and summarized in the following sections.
CONCEPTUAL PLAN
Storied Development is seeking an amendment to the approved Spring Valley Ranch PUD to establish a
new PUD Plan Map and PUD Guide to govern all future development of the property. This amendment is
necessitated to bring the plan forward to modern standards using contemporary planning practices while
Page | 2
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
better conforming to Garfield County’s current Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives. Some of the
Applicant’s prioritized goals for this amendment are to maintain the same density in a more compact and
clustered format, provide double the amount of open space, provide significant publicly accessible
amenities, provide protected wildlife areas, and to provide a substantial number of deed-restricted
Community Housing units for residents of Garfield County. This proposed amendment accomplishes these
goals while significantly reducing required infrastructure and the overall footprint on the land.
The proposed amendment incorporates substantial modifications to arrive at much more desirable land plan.
The Conceptual Plan (Figure 1) maintains the approved density of 577 units in a more clustered
format while increasing the amount of Open Space by 100% (now 3,249 acres), providing a minimum of
450 acres of publicly accessible Open Space, providing a new public trailhead and 10 miles of new
public mountain bike trails, providing 1,320 acres of Wildlife Habitat Reserves, and conforming to the
Residential Low (RL) density Comprehensive Plan designation of 1 dwelling unit per 10 acres. The
Conceptual Plan also provides 58 units of deed-restricted Community Housing units for residents of
Garfield County, and 17 Community Housing Units for employees within the PUD.
ADJACENT LAND USE
The Spring Valley Ranch is bounded on the north by National Forest System lands managed by the White
River National Forest. The northwesternmost portion of the SVR is federal land managed by the Bureau
of Land Management’s Upper Colorado River District. The remainder of the adjacent lands surrounding
the property are a mixture of 35-acre ranchette parcels, rural subdivisions including the Christeleit
Subdivision, High Aspen Ranch, Homestead Estates, and some ranchland parcels. Notably, there are
several private inholdings within the boundaries of the property that are not a part of the proposed
development.
SITE FEATURES
SVR occupies a wide elevational range, from less than 6,900 feet in the southwestern comer to more than
9,400 feet in the northeastern comer. Because of this wide range, as well as differences in soil, slope, and
historic land use, the SVR supports a variety of habitat types.
4.1 HIGHER ELEVATION PLATEAU
The highest part of the property is an undulating plateau dominated by a mosaic
of mixed conifers (Engelmann spruce, subalpine fir, and Douglas fir), aspen, and
native meadows with a fringe of mountain big sagebrush. North facing aspects
within the mosaic support dense stands of Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir,
with varying amounts of Douglas fir. At the time Crockett (2000) prepared his
report, he documented aspen stands as relatively dense, with a lush understory
of native grasses and forbs. At the time of my site visit in 2022, many of the
aspen stands in this area have converted to 2-storied stands. A large portion,
perhaps up to 90% of the mature aspens have died off, fostering abundant
resprouting in the understory, creating a cohort of sapling-sized aspen
approximately 12’ tall beneath the towering older cohort of mature trees.
Page | 3
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
Figure 1. SPRING VALLEY RANCH CONCEPTUAL PLAN
This is a conceptual plan that is intended to illustrate one potential way the property could be developed
consistent with the proposed PUD amendment. The final development plans for the property may differ
from this conceptual plan, subject to the final approved PUD Plan Map and PUD Guide.
Page | 4
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
Portions of the open meadows are kept moist by snow
accumulations and the runoff from adjacent hills and ridges.
A few small stock ponds have been created at low points in
the meadows; some of the ponds have a small wetland fringe.
Hopkins Reservoir was quite small at the time of my August
2022 site visit but has the capability to contain approximately
120 acre-feet at full pool. Because of a lack of a consistent
water surface elevation Hopkins Reservoir does not support
wetland vegetation.
4.2 MIDDLE ELEVATION SLOPES AND
BENCHES
The steep, southwest-facing slope below the upper plateau is cloaked by a dense, homogenous community
of serviceberry and Gambel oak. This dense shrubland is broken by a few clumps of quaking aspen along
minor drainageways or seeps and larger clumps of Douglas fir in rocky
areas. In some places along the top of the slope, a zone of small, dense
aspen forms a narrow transition between the mountain shrubs and the
conifer-aspen-meadow mosaic.
At the base of the steep shrubby slope, nearly level benches have been
converted to agricultural use. Fringes of basin big sagebrush and
rabbitbrush around the non-native pastures and small grain fields
suggest that the benches were dominated by these shrubs prior to
agricultural use.
Between the agricultural benches and County Road 115 is another, less
extensive southwest- facing slope supporting more drought-tolerant
shrubs such as mountain mahogany, snowberry, antelope bitterbrush,
wax currant, and rabbitbrush in addition to serviceberry and oakbrush.
These slopes are punctuated by scattered individual Rocky Mountain
junipers and Douglas firs.
The slopes above the middle bench support a couple of springs, one
which gives rise to the unnamed stream that flows within a linear channel across the former wheat fields.
The historic Hopkins homestead is built adjacent to another spring which undoubtedly served as domestic
water for the household.
4.3 LANDIS CREEK AND MINOR EPHEMERAL
GULCHES
Landis Creek is the primary ecological connector between the higher and
lower elevation habitats described above and is one of the most important
ecological features of the site. The section of the creek that drops from the top
of the plateau and across the upper portion of the expansive southwest-facing
slope carries water for most of the year as a result of a narrow, bedrock-
confined gulch and input from seeps. In this reach, Landis Creek supports a
riparian community of aspen, blue spruce, thinleaf alder, willow, chokecherry,
hawthorn, elderberry, twinberry, and a variety of lush grasses and forbs. The
combination of accessible water, lush foliage, and riparian trees and shrubs
provides a preferential movement corridor for wildlife and supports species
that might not otherwise occur onsite.
Page | 5
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
However, the ecological value of Landis Creek is not consistent along its length. Stretches downstream
from point where surface flows are diverted for agricultural use are dry except during major runoff events.
The historic diversion is located at the slope break between the middle bench and the steeper upper portion
of the ranch. Because of the lack of surface flows, and less topographic shading as the gulch becomes wider,
reaches of Landis Creek below the historic diversion point do not support riparian vegetation.
Minor ephemeral drainageways also dissect the southwest-facing slope but, like the lower reaches of Landis
Creek, do not have sufficient water to support riparian vegetation. Some of these gulches are marked by
small ribbons of aspen or clumps of Douglas fir.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
5.1 SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
Soil map units and descriptions for the Spring Valley Ranch were obtained from the NRCS Web Soil Survey
(https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app ). A total of 17 Soil Map Units are found on the Ranch (Table 1).
The location of each map unit is shown in Figure 2.
Table 1. SPRING VALLEY RANCH SOIL MAP UNITS
Map Unit
Symbol Map Unit Name Acres
in AOI
Percent of
AOI
7 Almy loam, 12 to 25 percent slopes 1.8 0.0%
10 Anvik-Skylick-Sligting association, 10 to 25 percent slopes 256.3 4.2%
11 Anvik-Skylick-Sligting association, 25 to 50 percent slopes 1,018.7 16.7%
12 Arle-Ansari-Rock outcrop complex, 12 to 50 percent slopes 557.3 9.1%
18 Cochetopa-Antrobus association, 12 to 25 percent slopes 664.2 10.9%
19 Cochetopa-Antrobus association, 25 to 50 percent slopes 652.6 10.7%
34 Empedrado loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes 196.6 3.2%
35 Empedrado loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes 308.0 5.0%
48 Fughes stony loam, 3 to 12 percent slopes 109.6 1.8%
49 Goslin fine sandy loam, 3 to 6 percent slopes 24.6 0.4%
64 Jerry loam, 25 to 65 percent slopes 1,237.7 20.2%
69 Kilgore silt loam 89.7 1.5%
72 Kobar silty clay loam, 12 to 25 percent slopes 13.3 0.2%
87 Morval-Tridell complex, 12 to 50 percent slopes 86.5 1.4%
94 Showalter-Morval complex, 5 to 15 percent slopes 11.0 0.2%
95 Showalter-Morval complex, 15 to 25 percent slopes 874.9 14.3%
120 Water 12.1 0.2%
Totals for Area of Interest 6,115.8 100.0%
Page | 6
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
Figure 2. SPRING VALLEY RANCH SOIL MAP UNITS
Soil Map—Aspen-Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle, Garfield, and Pitkin Counties; and Flat Tops Area, ...
(Spring Valley Ranch)
39° 33' 22'' N
306000 307000 308000 309000 310000 311000 312000
39° 33' 22'' N
39° 28' 31'' N
306000 307000 308000 309000 310000 311000 312000
39° 28' 31'' N
Map Scale: 1:43,700 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet.
N 0 500 1000 2000
Meters
3000
Feet
0 2000 4000 8000 12000
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84
43
7
2
0
0
0
43
7
3
0
0
0
43
7
4
0
0
0
43
7
5
0
0
0
43
7
6
0
0
0
43
7
7
0
0
0
43
7
8
0
0
0
43
7
9
0
0
0
43
8
0
0
0
0
10
7
°
15
'
41
'
'
W
10
7
°
15
'
41
'
'
W
10
7
°
10
'
58
'
'
W
10
7
°
10
'
58
'
'
W
43
7
2
0
0
0
43
7
3
0
0
0
43
7
4
0
0
0
43
7
5
0
0
0
43
7
6
0
0
0
43
7
7
0
0
0
43
7
8
0
0
0
43
7
9
0
0
0
43
8
0
0
0
0
Page | 7
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
Soils across the Spring Valley Ranch are Well-Drained, with the exception of the Kilgore silt loam (Map
Unit 69), which is Poorly Drained. This map unit is associated with wetlands in the lower Spring Valley
pasture.
Soil Map Unit Runoff Classes across the Spring Valley Ranch range from Medium to High. KSAT 1 ranges
from Moderately Low to High.
CTL/Thompson (CTL/T) investigated subsoil conditions and reported results in their Preliminary
Geotechnical Investigation (Bowden 2000a). Their report includes a description of the subsoil conditions
found in exploratory borings and pits and a discussion of site development as influenced by geotechnical
considerations. Based on conditions disclosed by the exploratory borings and pits, site observations, results
of laboratory tests, engineering analysis of field and laboratory data and on experience recommendations
were made for planning purposes.
1) Borings and pits penetrated six generalized subsurface conditions, including the following:
a. Stiff to very stiff, slightly moist to moist, sandy to gravelly clay with occasional cobble;
b. Stiff to very stiff clay above dense to very dense, clayey to silty sands with gravels and
sandy gravels with occasional cobble;
c. Clays underlain by sands and gravels above comparatively shallow bedrock;
d. Organic clays above medium stiff to very stiff, sandy to gravelly clays or clayey sands
above medium dense to very dense, clayey to sandy gravels with cobbles and boulders;
e. Organic clays above medium dense to very dense, clayey to sandy gravels with cobbles
and boulders above medium stiff to very stiff, sandy to gravelly clays; and
f. Medium dense to dense cobbles and boulders underlain by clayey to sandy gravels.
Ground water was found in one boring two days after drilling. No free ground water was found in
exploratory pits during excavation.
2) The natural clays volume change potential was judged to range from a low compression to high
swelling potential. The natural sands and gravels were judged to possess a low to moderate
compression potential.
5.2 GEOLOGY AND HAZARD
CTL/Thompson prepared Geologic Evaluations for the proposed development of SVR in 2000, 2023, &
2024 (Bowden 2000b, Kellogg 2023, 2024). CTL/Thompson also prepared a Slope Stability Analysis for
proposed roads at SVR (Kellogg 2000). The results of these studies are summarized in this section.
Bedrock and surficial deposits referenced in this section are shown in Figures 3 and 4.
SVR is located in an area of complex regional geology at the conjunction of several structural geologic
elements. The White River Uplift is to the north; the Sawatch Uplift is to the east; the Elk Mountains to
the South, and the Grand Hogback is to the West. These are large scale features related to the continental
tectonic setting.
The degree of geologic activity at SVR is primarily influenced by a smaller scale localized feature, the
Carbondale Collapse Center (CCC). The CCC is a collapse feature with an aerial extent of approximately
200 square miles. Glenwood Springs, Carbondale, and the lower part of the Roaring Fork and Crystal River
Valleys are within the boundaries of the collapse feature.
1 Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water.
Page | 8
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
It is generally accepted that the collapse feature formed as the result of evaporite minerals in the
Pennsylvanian aged Eagle Valley Evaporite being dissolved and removed by circulating ground water.
Where this dissolution process undermines overlying bedrock units and surficial deposits, collapse of the
overlying materials has resulted in ground subsidence. Total subsidence in the CCC has been estimated on
the order of 3,000-4,000 feet, which has occurred over a time span of at least 3.7 million years. Assuming
4,000 vertical feet of uniform subsidence over a time span of 4 million years, theoretical subsidence rates
are on the order of 1 foot per 1000 years.
Bedrock units at SVR that influence geologic conditions include the Pennsylvanian-aged Eagle Valley
Evaporite and Eagle Valley Formation, the Pennsylvanian to Permian-aged Maroon Formation, and
Quaternary to Tertiary-aged Basalt Flows. These bedrock units have been fractured and faulted by regional
collapse originating in the Eagle Valley Evaporite. The Maroon Formation and Basalt Flows are nearest to
the ground surface and are the only bedrock units that outcrop over most of the site.
5.2.1 Bedrock Units
The Eagle Valley Evaporite is a heterogeneous rock unit with random pockets of highly soluble evaporite
minerals intermixed with pockets of low solubility sandstone, siltstone, and limestones. Where the soluble
minerals are overlain by unconsolidated material (stream gravels, soils, etc.), sinkholes can occur. The
amount of circulating groundwater which "drives" the subsidence mechanism is lower at Spring Valley
Ranch than in Roaring Fork River Valley.
The Eagle Valley Formation (map unit Pev) is a transitional unit that contains increasing amounts of
siltstone, sandstone, and limestone interbedded with decreasing amounts of evaporite beds.
The Maroon Formation (map unit P-Pm) consists of interbedded conglomerates, sandstones, siltstones, and
claystones. Maroon Formation outcrops are found at the northwest part of the Lower Area and at numerous
locations in the north part of the Ranch Lots area. Many of the surficial deposits to the north of Landis
Creek on the Lower Area and north part of the Ranch Lots Area appear to have been derived from the
Maroon Formation.
The most widespread rock outcrops at the site are the Basalt Flows (map unit QTb). Basalt Flows appear
to have occurred sporadically since late Tertiary time, throughout formation of the Carbondale Collapse
Center. Basalt Flows appear to occur over down faulted blocks of Maroon Formation and may be
interlayered with surficial deposits.
5.2.1 Surficial Deposits
Geologic conditions at Spring Valley Ranch have produced a varied and complex assortment of Quaternary
aged surficial deposits. The development of the surficial deposits has been primarily controlled by the
collapse process and simultaneous weathering, erosion, and mass wasting.
Faulting has reduced some of the bedrock to rubble and generated an underlying "stair step" structure with
down faulted basins. Throughout the down faulting process, weathering and erosion have acted on the
Maroon Formation, Basalt Flows and their rubblized derivatives to produce deposits of slopewash,
colluvium (map unit Qc) and alluvium. Colluvium grades into slope failure complexes (map unit Qsfc)
where the colluvium has been draped over down faulted bedrock blocks.
Some areas have been identified as landslides (map unit Qls) and rockslides (map unit Qrs). Within down-
faulted basins and along major drainages, alluvium and colluvium are interfingered producing
undifferentiated deposits (map unit Qac). Lacustrine deposits (mapped unit Qlc) have accumulated in some
of the down faulted basins. Debris flow fans are found at the mouths of several drainages. Some of the
debris fans are recent and may be active (map unit Qdf), other debris fans are ancient and appear dormant
(map unit Qdfo).
Page | 11
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
5.3 GROUNDWATER AND AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS
5.3.1 Physical Characteristics
5.3.1.1 Geologic Conditions
The recharge area of the Spring Valley Hydrologic System is comprised of approximately 15.4 square
miles. This area (Figure 5) varies in elevation from 6,870 to 9,400 feet. The surficial geology of this
recharge area may be divided, for purposes of hydrologic consideration, into three petrographic types:
• Siltstones, sandstones, clay stones and conglomerates of the Pennsylvanian/Permian Maroon
Formation,
• Basalt flows, basalt talus, colluvium comprised predominantly of basaltic material, all of Tertiary
and early Quaternary age, and
• Quaternary lacustrine materials comprised predominantly of fine-grained products of the chemical
and mechanical weathering of the older rock materials that were deposited in a lake. Samples from
recent well drilling have been examined which indicate deposits of volcanic ash in the lower
portions of the lake basin.
5.3.1.2 Hydrologic Conditions
The conditions and events noted above created the geologic setting for the Spring Valley Hydrologic
System. The other component of the system is the precipitation provided by the meteorological
environment.
The 1991-2020 climate data is available at a station scale but also as a gridded dataset produced by the
PRISM Climate Group on an 800-meter resolution grid (Erion and Ryan 2024). This gridded data was
overlain on the geologic unit map within the SVA tributary area as shown in Figure 6. The 1991-2020
average annual precipitation was calculated for each geologic unit which include: PPM –
Pennsylvanian/Permian Maroon Formation, Tb – Tertiary Volcanic Materials, and Ql – Quaternary Lake
Sediments (aka SVA). The average annual precipitation over the SVA tributary area was calculated to be
18,384 acre-feet.
5.3.1.3 Precipitation Infiltration
The effective introduction of this precipitation into the underground hydrologic system is largely dependent
upon the character of the surface geology. Fractured basalt flows, basalt talus and colluvium comprised
predominantly of granular soil and rock are highly permeable, wherein it is estimated that, at least 60% of
the precipitation will enter the aquifer after evaporation, transpiration, and surface run-off.
Surface runoff is demonstrably low, as evidenced by drainages along CR 115, where many of the natural
drainage swales crossed by the road do not have culverts and do not have the appearance of areas that
transport or pond water. It is reported, by longtime residents of the area, that only on occasions of extremely
high snow melt or cloud burst, does flooding of the road occur.
The topographic characteristics of the highly basaltic surfaces are further evidence of its high infiltration
rate. This is an area that sustains an average precipitation of 20 to 30 inches per year on slopes of 10 to 50
percent. If the rate of infiltration of precipitation was not exceptionally high, the large volume of high
velocity run-off would have eroded major drainage swales and gulches down the slopes, nearly
perpendicular to the contours. The precipitation does occur, but the run-off does not. Instead, this
precipitation enters the fractured and otherwise highly porous basaltic materials and is detained there in a
series of cascading aquifers that are interconnected by shear fracture zones. These fracture zones function
as control orifices and slowly release the gravity flow of water to springs and the aquifers below.
Page | 12
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
Figure 5. MAP OF SPRING VALLEY AQUIFER AND TRIBUTARY AREA
Page | 13
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
Figure 6. SPRING VALLEY AQUIFER 1990-2020 NORMAL PRECIPITATION
Page | 14
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
Conversely, fractured Maroon Formation overlain with silty, loam soils supporting moderate to heavy
vegetation will result in the infiltration of approximately 20% of the precipitation with the balance being
lost to evapotranspiration and surface runoff. Where this surface runoff must cross the basaltic areas noted
above, much of it will enter the groundwater system.
The conditions described above were applied to the map of the recharge area, prepared on the basis of
published geologic mapping and personal observations. Based on this information, the average precipitation
amount in the recharge area and the potential infiltration amount entering the underground hydrologic
system was estimated (Table 2).
Table 2. ESTIMATED PRECIPITATION AND INFILTRATION INTO THE SPRING
VALLEY AQUIFER
Geologic
Unit Area (ac) Infiltration
Rate
Mean Precip
(in)
Average
Annual
Precipitation
Volume (AF)
Estimated
Infiltration
PPM 2,132 20% 24 4,281 856
Tb 6,290 60% 22 11,763 7,058
Ql 1,453 60% 19 2,341 1,404
Total 9,875 18,384 9,318
Based on the assumed infiltration rates of the geologic units, the estimated infiltration has been quantified
to be 9,318 acre-feet (Erion and Ryan 2024).
5.3.2 Aquifer Recharge
The total amount of infiltration is not realized as recharge to the aquifer due to losses from
evapotranspiration (ET) and surface runoff. The probable recharge was determined using the following
formula:
Recharge = Precipitation – Evapotranspiration - Landis Creek surface flows Eq 1.1
Evapotranspiration was quantified by overlaying the National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD), a satellite
derived depiction of land cover, on the SVA Tributary area boundary and quantifying the area of various
vegetation types. The total annual potential ET was quantified to be 13,842 acre-feet/year and represents a
conservative value which assumes water is always available to meet the demands of the various vegetation
types. Utilizing the Equation 1.1 results in the following estimated recharge:
Recharge = 18,384 – 13,842 - 600 = 3,942 acre-feet
These values represent average recharge conditions using conservative depletion assumptions. This is
water available for groundwater withdrawals without creating an aquifer deficit, i.e., “mining”, since it will
be replenished on an average annual basis.
5.3.3 Anticipated Diversions and Depletions
The development water demands for Storied Development’s amended SVR PUD plan (currently being
reviewed by Garfield County) will be less than the previously approved SVR PUD demands; and less than
the demands already decreed and covered by existing court approved augmentation plans in Case Nos.
87CW155 and 98CW254, the latter being the operative plan for augmentation. Basalt Water Conservancy
District (BWCD) augments the structures, including wells, surface and storage structures, which will supply
water for the development. In sum, the 98CW254 augmentation plan allows for an annual water demand of
Page | 15
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
1457 acre-feet of diversions, a total annual consumptive use of 974 acre-feet in a dry year, and an overall
augmentation requirement of 420 acre-feet. The 98CW254 decree allows for modifications and
reconfigurations of the number of EQRs and amounts of irrigated acreage so long as the overall SVR PUD
consumptive use does not exceed 974 acre-feet annually.
Potable diversions, which are attributed solely to groundwater sources, total 473.1 acre-feet with associated
depletions of 177.5 acre-feet and include domestic in-house and irrigation uses associated with 695 EQR’s
and 90 acres of domestic irrigation. The non-potable diversion, of which a portion will be satisfied by senior
surface water rights, total 983.9 acre-feet with associated depletions of 796.96 acre-feet which includes uses
of non-domestic irrigation for 420 acres and 24 acres of open surface water evaporation. Overall, the total
project diversion demands are 1,457 acre-feet with associated depletions of 974 acre-feet. Again, Case No.
98CW254, paragraph 10.c. allows for modification to the number of EQRs and irrigated acreage if the
depletions do not exceed 974 acre-feet.
In contrast, Storied Development’s amended SVR PUD proposal seeks to modify certain components of
the previously approved PUD including the type and number of development units, irrigation requirements,
and to add snowmaking as a use of its non-potable water system. CRE has calculated the water requirements
for the revised PUD plan and in sum, the total water demand for the revised PUD plan is 1,221 acre-
feet/year, with total consumptive use of 688 acrefeet/ year. This is less than the contemplated and approved
water demand associated with the currently approved PUD; however, for purposes of this report and aquifer
sustainability analysis, CRE utilizes the larger acre foot demands and depletions described above and
approved in the 98CW254 case.
5.3.4 Total Spring Valley Aquifer Demands
In addition to the demands associated with Spring Valley Ranch, several other subdivisions and individual
properties rely upon the Spring Valley Aquifer (SVA) for all or a portion of their overall water supplies.
The developments and associated plans for augmentation were reviewed by Erion and Ryan (2024). The
demands include Spring Valley Ranch, Los Amigos (Elk Springs/Pinyon Mesa), Colorado Mountain
College, Berkeley/Lake Springs Ranch, Lookout Mountain Ranch, and individual lot owners.
The total diversion from all developments relying on the SVA totals approximately 1,920 acre-feet while
the total depletions are approximately 1,263 acre-feet. The total diversions represent 49% of the anticipated
recharge while the total depletions represent only one third of the anticipated annual recharge to the SVA.
The analysis illustrates that the anticipated uses, based on conservative assumptions, do not result in long-
term mining of the groundwater aquifer as the average annual demands of the developments are met by the
average annual recharge to the aquifer. In addition, these demands do not consider the fact that a portion of
the SVR irrigation demands will be met with senior, surface water rights, which results in irrigation return
flows that deep percolate and recharge the SVA. The sustainability analysis is conservative and supports
the conclusion that there is adequate groundwater supplies for all users of the SVA. This analysis, in
conjunction with a groundwater monitoring plan, allows all SVA water users to manage the water resource
in a sustainable manner.
5.3.5 Legal Water Supply
Miller (2023) summarized the current legal water supply available for the Spring Valley Ranch PUD and
demonstrated that this water supply is adequate to serve the revised PUD plan. The overall water supply
for the development will be supplied from surface water diversions under senior decreed irrigation water
rights out of Landis Creek; existing and proposed wells and springs; and storage structures, including
Hopkins Reservoir, located on the Property.
Miller cited 20 years of various detailed engineering investigations that confirm that surface and
groundwater resources are physically available for the development, and that well diversions will be
sustainable, and not have a long-term negative impact on the SVA.
Page | 16
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
In sum, the legal water supply for the development is based on Water Court decrees approving water rights,
changes of water rights, and two plans for augmentation. These existing decrees provide a legally reliable
water supply for the residential development, commercial uses, golf course, and related potable and
agricultural open space irrigation, as shown in the amended PUD plan. Augmentation water necessary to
offset any out-of-priority development depletions will be provided pursuant to contracts with the Basalt
Water Conservancy District. Irrigation of the golf course and agricultural open space will occur under senior
water rights; and will be supplemented by groundwater as necessary.
5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL
5.4.1 Wildlife
5.4.1.1 Federal and State-Listed Species
A list of threatened and endangered species was retrieved from the US Fish & Wildlife Service’s IPaC site
(USFWS 2022). IPaC provides a list of species and critical habitat that may occur on a site, based on
location information provided by an applicant. The IPaC list included the following species: Canada lynx
(Lynx canadensis), Gray Wolf (Canis lupus), Yellow-Billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus), Mexican
spotted owl (Strix occidentalis lucida), Colorado pikeminnow (Ptychochelius lucius), Razorback Sucker
(Xyrauchen texanus), Humpback Chub (Gila cypha), Bonytail Chub (Gila elegans), Ute Ladies-tresses
(Spiranthes diluvialis).
The SVR does not provide suitable habitat for Canada lynx foraging. While a dispersing lynx may travel
through the ranch, sufficient forage habitat is not present in sufficient acreage to entice a lynx to stick
around and hunt. Gray wolves are currently known from Moffat and Jackson Counties only. The project
does not include a predator management program. Therefore, wolves are not considered. Yellow-billed
cuckoo and Mexican spotted owl were dropped from detailed analysis because their current distribution
does not include the SVR. The big river fish were eliminated from further analysis since the project will
not lead to new water depletions (S. Miller, Project Water Attorney, personal communication with Kelly
Colfer, 10.25.2022), water quality degradation, or regulated flows that effect these fish. As a result of the
foregoing, development at SVR will have no effect on federally listed wildlife species.
CPW lists a number of Species of Concern, State Threatened and State Endangered Species. For the
complete list, see: https://cpw.state.co.us/learn/Pages/SOC-ThreatenedEndangeredList.aspx . The only
species that has suitable habitat within the Spring Valley Ranch is the Greater Sage Grouse ((Centrocercus
urophasianus), listed as a Species of Concern). Sage grouse used to be quite common in the greater Missouri
Heights area (Pettersen 2007). As the area was converted from sagebrush flats to agricultural meadows, and
lately, residential subdivisions, sage grouse have not been documented in the area for some time. As a
result, development of SVR will have no effect on state listed wildlife species.
Page | 17
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
5.4.1.2 Elk
Elk activities mapped on the property include summer range 2, winter range 3, winter concentration area4,
and production area(s)5 (Figure 3). The vast majority of the SVR property is mapped by CPW as elk winter
range. Severe winter range 6 is mapped on a small (<100 acres) portion of the southeastern corner of the
property. Elk using the property are managed as part of the Frying Pan River Herd (DAU E-16). The 2023
post-hunt population estimate for this herd is 9,820 animals, with a bull/cow ratio of 247.
Both parameters are above the objectives spelled out in the 2013 DAU E-16 Plan, which states a population
objective of 5,500-8,500 animals, and a bull ratio objective of 20 (CPW 2013)8. However, the E-16 calf
ratio has been declining since 1996 (CPW 2013), a sign that herd productivity is declining and a concerning
metric for wildlife managers. Elk were observed on the property in early October during my site visit.
Gambel oak and mountain shrub communities found on the property provide important winter forage
opportunities for elk. These communities and aspen stands provide forage during the remainder of the year
as well.
The dense mountain shrub community above the middle bench, in combination with several springs along
the slope provide security and water sought out by females during parturition. A total of 1,551 acres of
production range are mapped on these slopes by CPW as production range. Additionally, CPW recently
completed a revision of the Elk SAM mapping; the revision adds 521 additional production range acres
within the parcel boundary in the bottom of Spring Valley as shown in Figure 3.
Where elk calve varies from year to year depending on habitat and weather conditions. In those
years when there is snow remaining at mid to higher elevations, elk may calve at lower elevations
than is reflected in SAM mapping. In those years when there is an earlier spring green-up at higher
elevations, cow elk are likely to move into higher areas to calve. One constant is that elk cows
require water within one-half mile while calving. Security cover is notably absent in the Spring
Valley lower production range polygon.
5.4.1.3 Mule Deer
Mule deer activity mapped on the property includes summer range, winter range, and a winter
concentration area 9 (Figure 4). Deer on the property are managed as part of the Basalt herd, DAU
D-53. The population objective for DAU D-53 is 4,000-6,000 individuals, with a buck:doe ratio
of 32-40. The 2021 post-hunt population is estimated at 3,860 with a buck:doe ratio of 28.
2 Elk Summer Range - That part of the range of a species where 90% of the individuals are located between spring
green-up and the first heavy snowfall.
3 Elk Winter Range - That part of the overall range of a species where 90 percent of the individuals are located during
the average five winters out of ten from the first heavy snowfall to spring green-up.
4 Elk Winter Concentration Area - That part of the winter range of elk where densities are at least 200% greater than
the surrounding winter range density during the average five winters out of ten from the first heavy snowfall to spring
green-up, or during a site-specific period of winter as defined for each Data Analysis Unit. Listed by CPW as a HPH.
5 Elk Production Area - That part of the overall range of elk occupied by the females from May 15 to June 15 for
calving. Listed by CPW as a HPH.
6 Elk Severe Winter Range - That part of the range of a species where 90 percent of the individuals are located when
the annual snowpack is at its maximum and/or temperatures are at a minimum in the two worst winters out of ten.
Listed by CPW as a HPH.
7 http://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/Hunting/BigGame/Statistics/Elk/2023ElkPopulationEstimates.pdf
8 CPW. 2013. Frying Pan River Elk Herd E-16 Data Analysis Unit Plan. CPW, Glenwood Springs, CO
9 Mule Deer Winter Concentration Area - Defined the same as elk winter concentration area.
C:\Users\Kelly\Documents\AKC\Western Bionomics\Logo\Logo2 blue background.jpg
SPRING VALLEY
RANCH
FIGURE 3. ELK RANGE
0
1" =
Horizontal Scale
2000'
2000'4000'1000'2000'
ELK PRODUCTION RANGE
ELK SEVERE WINTER RANGE
ELK WINTER RANGE SOUTH OF BLUE LINE
LAN
D
I
S
CR
E
E
K
HOPKINS
RESERVOIR
HOPKINS
HOMESTEAD
AND WETLAND
M
I
D
D
L
E
B
E
N
C
H
C
R
E
E
K
NOTES:
1) Drawing based on 05-10-24 Conceptual Plan
2) Elk range mapping per CPW SAM
12-22-2023
3) This is a conceptual plan that is intended to
illustrate one potential way the property could
be developed consistent with the proposed
PUD amendment. The final development
plans for the property may differ from this
conceptual plan, subject to the final approved
PUD Plan Map and PUD Guide.
1 ADD NEW CPW ELK PRODUCTION RANGE 4-2-2024
ELK WINTER CONCENTRATION AREA
Page | 19
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
The most recent 3-year (2013-2015) average fawn:doe ratio is 45 fawns per 100 does (CPW
2020)10. CPW believes that this ratio should yield a stable population.
5.4.1.4 Black Bear
The Spring Valley Ranch falls within Black bear DAU B-11, located in the Roaring Fork and Eagle River
valleys. Annual bear mortality in B-11 has been increasing over the past 2 decades. The 10-year average
of annual bear mortality is 118 bears/year, and the 3-year average is 135 bears/year. Conflicts between
bears and humans are frequent, especially when natural foods are scarce and when garbage and other
human-related attractants are readily available. These conflicts are the combined result of increases in both
bear and human populations over the past several decades, increased availability of human-related food
sources, and more frequent poor natural food years. In B-11, bear conflict years are now the “new normal.”
The property is mapped as a black bear fall concentration area.11 One bear was observed during 2022 field
studies, and abundant evidence of their presence (scat, tree scarring, etc.) was observed on the property.
5.4.1.5 Raptors
Raptors with suitable habitat on or near the Spring Valley Ranch property include golden eagle, red-tailed
hawk, Swainson's hawk, northern goshawk, Cooper's hawk, sharp-shinned hawk, northern harrier,
American kestrel, great homed owl, long-eared owl, northern pygmy-owl, and northern saw-whet owl.
According to Crockett (2000), a golden eagle nest has been mapped by CPW on north-facing slopes of
Glenwood Canyon, slightly less than 1 mile from the northwestern corner of the Spring Valley Ranch.
Golden eagles cover large home ranges in search of prey, and it is therefore likely that onsite areas such as
meadows at higher elevations and pastures at lower elevations are visited throughout the year. Golden
eagles have anecdotally been observed hunting over the lower slopes and agricultural lands on both sides
of the county road.
Northern harriers have also been anecdotally observed hunting across the agricultural meadows southwest
of the county road during both summer and winter.
5.4.1.6 Other Wildlife Species
Additional wildlife species likely to use habitat present on Spring Valley Ranch include dusky (blue)
grouse, wild turkey,12 a broad variety of songbirds, woodpeckers, corvids, bats, and other small mammals
such as shrews, mice, voles, gophers, squirrels, and chipmunks, medium-sized mammals such as cottontail
rabbit, white-tailed jackrabbit, porcupine, marten, raccoon, red fox, coyote, bobcat, and now wolves as
CPW recently began to implement voter-mandated re-introduction. Mountain lions are likely present
during the winter as they are attracted to locations where mule deer congregate. Since the entire parcel is
within mule deer summer range, winter range, and winter concentration area, mountain lion presence is
likely.
10 CPW. 2020. Basalt Deer Herd Management Plan DAU D-53. CPW, Glenwood Springs, CO.
11 Black bear fall concentration area - That portion of the overall range occupied from August 15 until September 30
for the purpose of ingesting large quantities of mast and berries to establish fat reserves for the winter hibernation
period
12 Wild Turkey – Entire parcel located in SAM overall range. Northwesternmost corner identified to contain a wild
turkey roost site.
C:\Users\Kelly\Documents\AKC\Western Bionomics\Logo\Logo2 blue background.jpg
SPRING VALLEY
RANCH
FIGURE 4. MULE
DEER RANGE
NOTES:
1) Drawing based on 04-29-24 Conceptual Plan
2) Mule Deer Range mapping per CPW SAM
12-22-2023
3) This is a conceptual plan that is intended to
illustrate one potential way the property could
be developed consistent with the proposed
PUD amendment. The final development
plans for the property may differ from this
conceptual plan, subject to the final approved
PUD Plan Map and PUD Guide.
0
1" =
Horizontal Scale
2000'
2000'4000'1000'2000'
MULE DEER WINTER CONCENTRATION AREA
MULE DEER WINTER RANGE
LAN
D
I
S
CR
E
E
K
HOPKINS
RESERVOIR
HOPKINS
HOMESTEAD
AND WETLAND
M
I
D
D
L
E
B
E
N
C
H
C
R
E
E
K
1 REVISE WINTER CONC AREA PER CPW 4-2-2024
Page | 21
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
5.4.2 Wetlands
Wetlands were originally delineated at Spring Valley Ranch in 1998 by Blair Leisure of Wright Water
Engineers (WWE) for the proposed “Chenoa” development project. A delineation report with mapping
was prepared by WWE in 1999 for US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) review and approval. The
delineation report documented 3 general areas of wetland:
• Wetlands in the agricultural lands south of County Road 115
• A 30-foot-wide unmapped wetland corridor along Landis Creek
• Fringe wetlands along a channelized stream in the Middle Bench (Including the Homestead
Wetland).
The largest wetland area is located in the agricultural fields south of CR 115. Dominant vegetation is
hydrophytic grasses, sedges, and rushes. Leisure suggested the hydrology source for this wetland is springs,
surface water, and a shallow groundwater table.
The unnamed perennial creek that flows through the middle bench originates from 2 springs located on the
steep oakbrush hillside above the bench. These springs feed the creek year-round; the creek has been
channelized into a ditch adjacent to the ranch road for the length of the old wheat fields, then along its
apparent original course until it crosses off of SVR property onto the Veltus parcel, then back onto the SVR
south of Veltus. Fringe wetlands line the creek for this entire length to Veltus parcel. At the point where
the stream channel exits the Veltus parcel back onto the SVR, fringe wetlands no longer line the channel.
In fact, on the date of my 2022 site visit, there was no water at all present in the channel below the Veltus
parcel. There is also a wetland adjacent to the Hopkins Homestead that does not connect to the perennial
stream.
The 1999 wetland delineation report further documented that Landis Creek is entirely diverted at the middle
bench diversion but nevertheless established a 30-foot buffer along Landis Creek above and below the
diversion. The Corps suggested that if development is planned near Landis Creek, associated wetlands
could be delineated to more precisely define their presence or absence, location, and size. The Corps
approved the wetland delineation in a letter dated September 1, 1999 (Corps file number 199875502). In a
later memo to the Corps’ file, Ms. Leisure documented that there was no channel or wetlands apparent
below Shaky Lake due to the middle bench diversion; thus, the Corps did not assert jurisdiction below
Shaky Lake.
In 2003 the project went through a series of minor revisions and Ms. Leisure completed an updated wetland
delineation on the middle bench wetlands. There was no change to Corps jurisdictional wetlands on the
middle bench. In 2006 Ms. Leisure was again requested to delineate wetlands on the middle bench. She
concluded that wetlands on the middle bench were largely the same as in the 2003 delineation. The 2006
project was not built.
In 2022, Wetlands were again delineated by Western Bionomics (Colfer 2023a). A delineation report was
prepared and is located in Appendix A of this document. The wetland delineation, with minor revisions to
wetland boundaries, was largely verified as unchanged from previously mapped wetlands (Figure 8).
AGRICULTURAL
OAK SHRUBLAND
OAK SHRUBLAND
OAK SHRUBLAND
OAK SHRUBLAND
OAK SHRUBLAND
AGRICULTURAL
AGRICULTURAL
AGRICULTURAL
AGRICULTURAL
MEADOW
MEADOW
MEAD
O
W
MEADOW
SAGEBRUSH
Sage
MEADOW
SPRUCE - FIR
SPRUCE - FIR - ASPEN
SPRUCE - FIR
ASPEN - FIR
ASPEN FOREST
FIR
ASPEN FOREST
SAGEBRUSH
AGRICULTURAL
AGR
I
C
U
L
T
U
R
A
L
AGRICULTURAL
SPRING VALLEY
RANCH
AQUATIC RESOURCES
0
1" =
Horizontal Scale
2000'
2000'4000'1000'2000'
LANDIS
CR
E
E
K
MIDDLE BENCH DIVERSION
HOPKINS
HOMESTEAD
AND WETLAND
M
I
D
D
L
E
B
E
N
C
H
C
R
E
E
K
C
R
1
1
5
WETLAND
STOCK/IRRIGATION POND
IRRIGATION
DITCH (TYP)
HOPKINS
RESERVOIR
SHAKY LAKE
LEGEND
WETLAND
STREAM
IRRIGATION DITCH
POND
SHEET
DRAWNBYDATE
Page | 23
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
5.4.3 Wildfire
White River Fire Consulting (2023) prepared a Wildfire Mitigation Report. The report was created to meet
initial and long-range development planning goals for the built environment and open space, to ensure
ecosystem and community sustainability and to integrate directives with social goals. Specific project goals
are to:
• Reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfire,
• Provide development options for the mitigation of wildfire,
• Develop an integrated management approach that encompasses all natural communities represented
at Spring Valley Ranch,
• Provide a tool to help residents of Spring Valley Ranch understand the complexity of the ecosystem
and more effectively protect their property from potential wildfires.
Vegetation management is needed throughout the upper montane zone of the western slope of the Colorado
Rocky Mountains to return forests and rangelands to an ecologically sustainable condition and to reduce
the potential for catastrophic wildfire and insect epidemics. Vegetative conditions at the Spring Valley
Ranch property are significantly divergent from their historic norm. A comprehensive evaluation of wildfire
hazard within Spring Valley Ranch was conducted; findings should be integrated into the overall restoration
prescriptions being developed for the property.
Page | 24
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
IMPACT ANALYSIS
6.1 SOILS
CTL/Thompson’s (CTL/T) Preliminary Geotechnical Study (Bowden 2000a) discovered no geological or
geotechnical constraints at Spring Valley Ranch that would preclude development for the intended
residential use. Their report concluded that, “The subsoil conditions are, in general, favorable for the
proposed development.”
CTL/T anticipates footings, possibly with a minimum dead load, will be the recommended foundation on
lots where low to moderate swelling potential clays occur at foundation elevations. Drilled piers will likely
be recommended on sites where highly expansive clays are exposed. Spread footings without a minimum
dead load requirement should be appropriate at sites where sand, gravels or low compression to low
expansion potential clays are at foundation elevations. CTL/T recommends that when building plans for
individual buildings are known, detailed soils and foundation investigations should be performed on a lot
by lot basis to determine the appropriate foundation type and to develop design criteria.
Their preliminary data indicates that concrete slabs-on-grade floors placed on the low compression to low
swell potential clays and natural gravels and sands will perform satisfactory if the soils below slabs are not
wetted. Where moderate to highly expansive clays occur at floor subgrade elevations it may be
recommended to construct living area floors as structural floors supported by the foundation with a crawl
space below the floor or replace the upper 1 to 2 feet of expansive clays with non-expansive structural fill.
Minimum pavement thicknesses will likely be appropriate in areas of sand and gravel subgrade. The clays
will not provide as good of subgrade support for pavements and will likely require thicker pavement
sections.
Control of surface drainage will be important to the performance of foundations and interior and exterior
slabs-on-grade. Surface drainage should be designed to provide rapid removal of surface runoff away from
buildings and roads.
6.2 GEOLOGY AND HAZARD
CTL/T’s Geologic Evaluation Studies (Bowden 2000b, Kellogg 2023, 2024) identified several geologic
conditions that need to be considered during the planning and development phases of the project. The
geologic conditions identified will not prevent the development of the property for the intended uses, but
mitigation may be required at some locations.
Geologic hazards at the site (Figures 9 and 10) include potentially unstable slopes, debris/mud flows, and
rockfall. Other concerns related to geologic conditions include regional issues of subsidence and radiation.
Geologic hazards will be updated per the most recent geology map of the SVR (Kellogg 2024).
Page | 27
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
6.3 GROUNDWATER AND AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS
6.3.1 Impact Conclusion
The estimated average annual recharge of 3,942 acre-feet is more than three times the estimated depletion
of 1,263 acre-feet for all users of the SVA. Under the proposed amended PUD plan, groundwater
withdrawals for irrigation will be less than calculated due to utilization of Landis Creek surface water rights,
which have historically been used to irrigate the property, and only using groundwater for supplemental
irrigation supplies. In addition to the annual recharge, it has been estimated by Gamba (2000) that there is
68,000 to 105,000 acre-feet of water in storage in the SVA and upland areas which essentially serve as an
underground reservoir to balance extreme dry year and extended drought-year recharge with water
demands. As was found in previous studies, there is sufficient water in storage in the SVA and available
from annual recharge to serve all the proposed uses without injuring the groundwater resource.
6.3.2 Legal Water Supply
Miller (2023) summarized the current legal water supply available for the Spring Valley Ranch and
demonstrated that the water supply is adequate to serve the revised PUD Plan. Miller’s summary stated
that the Developer’s water rights, court-decreed augmentation plans and change cases, well permits, and
water allotment contracts provide an adequate legal water supply for Storied Development’s amended PUD.
Storied Development’s contemplated water demands and consumptive uses will not exceed the Developer’s
already acquired water rights and water resources available for the Spring Valley Ranch PUD. To the extent
snowmaking use is not covered under existing decreed augmentation plans, Storied Development will
obtain additional BWCD contract, storage and well permit approvals.
6.4 ENVIRONMENTAL
6.4.1 Wildlife
A comprehensive Wildlife Mitigation Plan (WMP) was prepared by Colfer (2024) in close coordination
with Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW). Adverse impacts associated with residential, golf, and winter
recreation developments in areas of native habitat include habitat loss through removal of vegetation,
habitat loss through avoidance of the zone of disturbance associated with human activity, habitat
fragmentation, barriers to movement, and disturbance or mortality from the actions of pets. During
preparation of this WMP, several issues were identified as being the most significant regarding the
development of Spring Valley Ranch and are described in detail in the following sections. The plan
presented below seeks first to avoid impacting wildlife and their habitat. If impacts cannot be avoided, this
plan provides measures to minimize wildlife habitat impacts. Finally, if impacts cannot be avoided and
have been minimized, the plan presents opportunities to mitigate those unavoidable impacts. These primary
issues related to development at Spring Valley Ranch include:
1) Direct impact to elk and deer by development and indirect impact by human recreation in winter
range.
2) Direct impact to elk by development and indirect impact by human recreation in production range.
3) Direct impact to mule deer by development and indirect impact by human recreation in winter range
and in a winter concentration area.
4) Potential game damage conflicts.
5) Black Bear/Human conflicts.
Page | 28
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
6) Mountain Lion/Human conflicts.
These issues have in large part driven the avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures presented in
the Mitigation Plan (Section 7).
6.4.1.1 Development in Elk Winter Range
CPW has identified the vast majority of the Spring Valley Ranch property as elk winter range. Spring
Valley Ranch homesites and access roads located within elk winter range will directly reduce the production
of winter forage and will indirectly reduce security of winter range for elk. Domestic pets may harass the
herd when elk are in close proximity to building envelopes. Game damage is probable on ornamental trees
and shrubs unless unpalatable species are planted.
6.4.1.2 Development in Elk Production Range
Elk that calve above the middle bench in the areas proposed for Mountain and Ranch neighborhoods, and
within the proposed ski area, will likely be displaced by the presence of houses and roads. As suggested
by Wait and McNally (2004)13 these animals will be expected to utilize sites farther from residential
development for calving do to the indirect impact of noise and commotion associated with occupation of
residential structures. As reported by Skovlin et al (2002)14 elk prefer habitat within ½-mile of water during
the spring, summer, and fall, and perhaps even less during lactation. Such habitats are found along the
Landis Creek corrido and in association with the spring-fed tributaries to the unnamed Middle Bench
stream. Elk that utilize the lower Spring Valley production area during calving season may be displaced
in the vicinity of the Community Housing development; however over 500-acres within the SAM-
mapped production range would be preserved for use during elk calving season.
6.4.1.3 Development in Mule Deer Winter Range and Winter Concentration
Area
Like that of elk, the majority of Spring Valley Ranch is mapped by CPW as mule deer winter range.
Development in mule deer winter range will decrease the availability of forage within building envelopes
and potentially lead to game damage for ornamentals during the winter. The lower slopes of the ranch
immediately above CR 115 are mapped by CPW as a mule deer winter concentration area. Development
and recreation within winter range and concentration areas will have increased impacts on mule deer since,
by definition, the density of wintering deer is twice that of the surrounding winter range.
6.4.1.4 Recreation Conflicts in Elk and Mule Deer Winter Range
Winter recreation (backcountry skiing, cross country skiing, snowmobiling) in elk and mule deer winter
range (and deer winter concentration) represents potentially serious impacts to these animals since the
impacts occur when they are in a weakened condition, food supplies are low, and the ability to conserve
energy is critical to the animal’s survival. Recreationists cause a startle response in deer and elk, causing
animals to flee, requiring energy expenditures that may not be sustainable throughout the winter. The result
is decreased fitness in individuals and probable increased mortality. Studies have shown that the indirect
13 Wait, S. and H. McNally. 2004. Selection of habitats by wintering elk in a rapidly subdividing area of La Plata
County, Colorado. In Proceedings 4th International Urban Wildlife Symposium (Shaw et al., eds).
14 Skovlin, J.M., P. Zager, and B. Johnson. 2002. Elk Habitat Selectin and Evaluation. In North American Elk Ecology
and Management (D. Toweill and J.W. Thomas, eds). Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington and London.
Page | 29
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
impact of recreation can extend for as far as 1640 yards from the loudest forms of recreation such as ATVs
and MTBs15.
In addition to winter range, spring recreation has the potential to impact elk during parturition, and year-
round recreation disturbs wildlife (Danielle Neumann, CPW, personal communication).
6.4.1.5 Game Damage Conflicts
Elk and deer cause damage by browsing on trees, shrubs, and other ornamental plantings; by feeding on
alfalfa and grass in fields, pastures, and haystacks; and by running through fences. Because Colorado
statutes require compensation to landowners for agricultural property damage by big game animals, CPW
personnel spend considerable time and effort preventing, investigating, and evaluating a variety of damage
problems each year.
Numerous preventative measures are available to minimize this conflict, including steps that can be taken
before the damage occurs. These include crop alternatives, lure crops, and changes in planting and
harvesting techniques. Other options include steps that can be taken after the damage has started, including
frightening devices, repellents, trapping, and hunting season modifications. In addition, habitat
enhancement efforts can entice elk and deer away from ornamental plantings and agricultural crops.
6.4.1.6 Black Bear
Most conflicts between bears and people are linked to careless handling of food and/or garbage.
Black bears are opportunistic omnivores, and they will eat almost anything, including human
food, garbage, bird food, and pet and livestock food when available. Once a bear has found the
easily accessible, consistent food source that human settlements can offer, it may overcome its
natural wariness of people and visit regularly, increasing the chance of a human/bear encounter.
6.4.1.7 Wildlife Impact Mitigation
(a) Goals
The goal of this WMP is to avoid, minimize, and/or mitigate the impact of the development on all wildlife
species using the property. Specific objectives include:
1) Avoid or minimize wildlife impacts that would have occurred with prior development plans for
Spring Valley Ranch.
2) Provide for continued utilization of seasonal wildlife habitats on the property.
3) Preserve the Landis Creek riparian corridor.
4) Minimize physical impacts to elk production range, elk and mule deer winter range, and habitat for
other wildlife species.
5) Minimize recreational disturbance to elk using the property.
6) Minimize recreational disturbance to mule deer using the property.
7) Minimize human/wildlife conflicts by implementing homeowner occupancy and use restrictions.
15 Wisdom, Michael J.; Ager, Alan A.; Preisler, Haiganoush K.; Cimon, Norman J.; Johnson, Bruce K. 2004. Effects
of off-road recreation on mule deer and elk. In: Transactions of the 69th North American Wildlife and Natural
Resources Conference: 531-550.
Page | 30
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
8) Maintain habitat connectivity within and adjacent to Spring Valley Ranch.
9) Minimize the wildlife habitat impacts of homeowners’ amenities that include a comprehensive trail
system, golf course, and ski area.
10) Mitigate the impact of development by establishing Wildlife Habitat Reserves, which will be
managed to maintain or enhance habitat effectiveness.
11) Mitigate the impact of development by establishment of a Real Estate Transfer Fee to provide funds
to be administered by CPW for habitat projects within CPW’s Elk Data Analysis Unit E-16.
(b) Mitigation Action Items
Avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures will be memorialized in the declaration of covenants,
conditions, and restrictions for the Spring Valley Ranch Homeowner’s Association. The Wildlife
Mitigation Plan is included in its entirety in Appendix B and summarized below:
Avoidance
• Designate a minimum of 3,249 acres of Open Space
• Avoid impacts to 68% of the elk production range on Spring Valley Ranch
• Avoid impacts to 54% of elk winter range on Spring Valley Ranch
• Designate a Landis Creek Wildlife Corridor
• Avoid impacts to active raptor nests.
Minimization
• Designation of Maximum Lot Coverage Ratios
• Designation of Maximum Lawn and Irrigated Landscaping Size
• Landscaping and Lighting Requirements
• Fencing Requirements
• Seasonal Access and Use Restrictions
• Garbage, Trash, Compost, Containers, & BBQ Grill Restrictions
• Pet Control Restrictions
• CPW Indemnification from Wildlife Damage Claims
• Golf Course and Open Space Management
• Tree and Native Shrub Preservation
• Weed Control
• Residential Landscape Regulations
• Security Enforcement
Mitigation
• Designation of over 1,320 acres of Wildlife Habitat Reserves
• Establishment of a Real Estate Transfer Fee for Wildlife Benefit
Page | 31
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 28, 2024
It is understood that the Wildlife Mitigation Plan will be recorded. Furthermore, the Wildlife Mitigation
Plan shall not be amended without the written consent of the local CPW District Wildlife Manager and
Garfield County Board of County Commissioners. No amendment shall require the approval of any owner
except Spring Valley Ranch. No Owner shall be deemed to be a third-party beneficiary of the Wildlife
Mitigation Plan, nor shall this Plan be enforceable by any Owner, except Spring Valley Ranch. If any
conflict occurs between the Association Documents and the Wildlife Mitigation Plan, the more restrictive
provision shall take precedent. This entire Wildlife Mitigation Plan, specifically those sections
addressing dogs, fencing, garbage management, and noxious weed control can be enforced by Spring
Valley Ranch Property Owners' Association or by Garfield County.
6.4.2 Wetlands
The Spring Valley Ranch Conceptual Plan exhibits 4 road crossings on Landis Creek, one road crossing of
the unnamed Middle Bench stream, and 2 crossings at each of the spring-fed tributaries to the Middle Bench
stream. Prior to any wetland disturbance, wetlands will be delineated at the specific impact site and overlaid
on the construction drawings to determine wetland impacts, if any. These plans will be used to prepare a
Pre-Construction Notification for submittal to the Army Corps of Engineers. The proposed road crossings
are expected to comply with the terms and conditions of Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit 14
(NWP14) for Linear Transportation Projects.
NWP14 permits activities required for crossings of waters of the United States associated with the
construction, expansion, modification, or improvement of linear transportation projects (e.g., roads,
highways, railways, trails, driveways, airport runways, and taxiways) in waters of the United States. The
discharge of dredged or fill material cannot cause the loss of greater than 1/2-acre of waters of the United
States.
6.4.3 Wildfire
The White River Fire Consulting Wildfire Mitigation Report prescribed project-wide vegetation restoration
treatments including:
•Maintain meadows,
•Create strategic fuel breaks to reduce vegetation density, primarily through selective cutting, to
remove undesirable species and retain mature healthy plants, and
•Implement prescribed burning where feasible.
Other recommended actions include the utilization of ignition resistant construction for all homes built in
the development, including Class 1 ignition resistant construction for selected properties. This is in
combination with individual defensible space and other fuel reduction mitigation. Other infrastructure
recommendations are proposed in the White River Fire Consulting Report to meet adopted code
compliance.
The overall intent of the Wildfire Plan is to look, holistically, at the built and natural environments to create
a sustainable development that is in concert with sound ecological principles while remaining fire resistant.
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 24, 2024
APPENDIX A – AQUATIC RESOURCE
DELINEATION REPORT
SPRING VALLEY RANCH
AQUATIC RESOURCE DELINEATION
March 1, 2023
Prepared For
Storied Development
9875 N. Tuhaye Park Drive
Kamas, UT 84036
and
Western Colorado Regulatory Office
400 Rood Avenue Room 142
Grand Junction, CO 81501-2563
Prepared By
WESTERN BIONOMICS INC.
Natural Resource Management Services
31040 Willow Lane • Steamboat Springs, CO 80487
Ph: 970-846-8223 • kscolfer@westernbionomics.com
Western Bionomics Inc. Natural Resource Management Services Page i
Spring Valley Ranch Aquatic Resource Delineation March 1, 2023
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The 5908.43± acre Spring Valley Ranch is located southeast of Glenwood Springs in unincorporated
Garfield County. Storied Development is proposing to develop a residential subdivision on the Ranch. To
facilitate the project’s compliance with the Clean Water Act, Western Bionomics has conducted an Aquatic
Resource Delineation at the project location.
Wetlands were originally delineated at Spring Valley Ranch in 1998 and again in 2003 for previous
development projects that did not get implemented. These prior delineations were referenced and updated
by a wetland examination performed in 2022. Four general areas of wetland are found at the Ranch:
• Wetlands in the agricultural lands south of County Road 115
• A 30-foot-wide unmapped wetland corridor along Landis Creek
• Fringe wetlands along a channelized stream in the Middle Bench (Including the Homestead
Wetland).
• A wetland associated with the Hopkins Homestead.
In addition, a reservoir, Hopkins Reservoir, is located at the upper end of the property. The constantly
shifting shoreline as the reservoir is filled and withdrawn prevents any wetland from becoming established.
A total of 3.05 acres of palustrine emergent herbaceous wetlands were delineated along the Middle Bench
stream. Additionally, the 2006 delineation documented 69.5 acres of palustrine emergent herbaceous
wetlands in the hay meadow below County Road 115. Finally, wetlands are present along Landis Creek
that were not delineated. Based on the documented correspondence with the Corps that has occurred with
prior projects, a 3-mile reach of Landis Creek is jurisdictional from its headwater to Shaky Lake. Below
Shaky Lake, there are no jurisdictional waters.
Surface runoff is demonstrably low, as evidenced by drainages along CR 115, where many of the natural
drainage swales crossed by the road do not have culverts and do not have the appearance of areas that
transport or pond water. It is reported, by longtime residents of the area, that only on occasions of extremely
high snow melt or cloud burst, does flooding of the road occur. Even the unnamed Middle Bench stream
flow disappears prior to exiting the property.
The 100-year floodplain at the location of the project area has not been mapped by FEMA. Therefore, the
project area is not located within the limits of the 100-year floodplain.
Western Bionomics Inc. Natural Resource Management Services Page ii
Spring Valley Ranch Aquatic Resource Delineation March 1, 2023
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................. 1
LOCATION ........................................................................................................................................................ 1
SITE HISTORY ................................................................................................................................................. 1
METHODS ......................................................................................................................................................... 2
RESULTS ........................................................................................................................................................... 3
5.1 AQUATIC RESOURCES .......................................................................................................................................... 3
5.1.1 Overview ................................................................................................................................................ 3
5.1.2 Physical Characteristics ........................................................................................................................ 4
5.1.2.1 Soils ...................................................................................................................................................................... 4
5.1.2.2 Vegetation ............................................................................................................................................................. 5
5.1.2.3 Hydrology ............................................................................................................................................................. 5
5.1.3 Interstate or Foreign Commerce ........................................................................................................... 6
AQUATIC RESOURCE DELINEATION SUMMARY ................................................................................ 6
PROPOSED PROJECT .................................................................................................................................... 6
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................... 7
APPENDIX A – AQUATIC RESOURCE DELINEATION MAP
APPENDIX B – PHOTOGRAPHS
APPENDIX C – PLANT LIST
APPENDIX D – NRCS SOIL REPORT
Western Bionomics Inc. Natural Resource Management Services Page iii
Spring Valley Ranch Aquatic Resource Delineation March 1, 2023
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
BMP Best Management Practice
OHWM Ordinary High Water Mark
PEM Palustrine Emergent Wetland Vegetation
PFO Palustrine Forested Wetland Vegetation
PSS Palustrine Scrub-Shrub Wetland Vegetation
COE US Army Corps of Engineers
FWS US Fish and Wildlife Service
UTM Universal Transverse Mercator coordinate system
AA Water Resource Assessment Area
Western Bionomics Inc. Natural Resource Management Services Page 1
Spring Valley Ranch Aquatic Resource Delineation March 1, 2023
INTRODUCTION
Storied Development is proposing to develop a residential subdivision on the Spring Valley Ranch. To
facilitate the project’s compliance with the Clean Water Act, Western Bionomics has conducted an Aquatic
Resource Delineation at the project location. The project proponent and primary contacts are listed below.
Proponent: Storied Development
ATTN: Rich Wagner
10105 N. Tuhaye Park Drive |
Kamas, UT 84036
rwagner@storiedliving.com
530.448.3157
Primary Contact: Kelly Colfer
This document establishes the limits of federal jurisdiction with respect to Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act. The following narrative presents the methods used to delineate aquatic resources, the results of our
investigation, and a brief description of the proposed project. Representative drawings, field data sheets,
and site photographs are included in the Appendices.
LOCATION
Spring Valley Ranch is located southeast of Glenwood Springs in unincorporated Garfield County. The
Ranch occupies 5908.43± acres in T6N, R88W, portions of Sections 14-16, 20-23, 26-29, & 32-34, at
39.516383°, -107.215993° (WGS 84). The property is comprised of 4 Garfield County parcels, identified
as PINs 218720100168, 218716100169, 218733100152, & 218726200168. Elevation ranges from 6893’
MSL in the lower elevation pasturelands, up to 9460’ MSL at the northern property boundary atop the
southern flank of Glenwood Canyon. The dominant cover types present on the property include irrigated
grasslands, native grassland, mountain shrubland, aspen woodland, and mixed conifer
The project assessment area has been defined to encompass all areas that could potentially be affected by
the proposed project.
The project area can be reached from the Garfield County Courthouse at 109 8th Street in Glenwood
Springs, take State Highway 82 / Grand Avenue 10.9 miles to Spring Valley Road. Turn left and follow
Spring Valley Road for 2.1 miles. Turn left on County Road 115 / Red Canyon Road. Follow CR 115 for
3.1 miles to the Ranch Headquarters.
SITE HISTORY
Wetlands were originally delineated at Spring Valley Ranch in 1998 by Blair Leisure of Wright Water
Engineers (WWE) for the proposed “Chenoa” development project (COE File #199875502). A delineation
report with mapping was prepared by WWE in 1999 for US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) review and
approval. The delineation report documented 3 general areas of wetland:
Western Bionomics Inc. Natural Resource Management Services Page 2
Spring Valley Ranch Aquatic Resource Delineation March 1, 2023
• Wetlands in the agricultural lands south of County Road 115
• A 30-foot-wide unmapped wetland corridor along Landis Creek
• Fringe wetlands along a channelized stream in the Middle Bench (Including the Homestead
Wetland).
• A wetland associated with the Hopkins Homestead.
The most significant wetland area is located in the agricultural fields south of CR 115. Dominant vegetation
is hydrophytic grasses, sedges, and rushes. Leisure (2006) suggested the hydrology source for this wetland
is springs, surface water, and a shallow groundwater table.
The unnamed perennial creek that flows through the Middle Bench originates from 2 springs located on the
steep oakbrush hillside above the bench. These springs feed the creek year-round; the creek has been
channelized into a ditch adjacent to the ranch road for the length of the old wheat fields, then flows along
its apparent original course until it crosses off of SVR property onto the Veltus parcel, then back onto the
SVR south of Veltus. Fringe wetlands line the creek for this entire length to Veltus parcel. At the point
where the stream channel exits the Veltus parcel back onto the SVR, fringe wetlands no longer line the
channel. In fact, on the date of my 2022 site visit, there was no water at all present in the channel below
the Veltus parcel. There is also a wetland adjacent to the Hopkins Homestead that does not connect to the
perennial stream. This wetland is fed by a spring just above the Homestead and appears to have been the
location of an old embankment pond associated with the Homestead.
The 1999 wetland delineation report further documented that Landis Creek is entirely diverted at the Middle
Bench diversion but nevertheless established a 30-foot buffer along Landis Creek above and below the
diversion. The Corps suggested that if development is planned near Landis Creek, associated wetlands
could be delineated to more precisely define their presence or absence, location, and size. The Corps
approved the wetland delineation in a letter dated September 1, 1999 (Corps file number 199875502). In a
later memo to the Corps’ file, Ms. Leisure documented that there was no channel or wetlands apparent
below Shaky Lake due to the middle bench diversion; the Corps agreed and did not assert jurisdiction below
Shaky Lake.
In 2003 the project went through a series of minor revisions and Ms. Leisure completed an updated wetland
delineation on the Middle Bench wetlands. There was no change to Corps jurisdictional wetlands on the
Middle Bench. In 2006 Ms. Leisure was again requested to delineate wetlands on the Middle Bench. She
concluded that wetlands on the Middle Bench were largely the same as depicted in the 2003 delineation.
The 2006 project was not built.
In October 2022 Western Bionomics visited the Spring Valley Ranch and verified the previous delineation.
At the location of the Middle Bench stream, the 3 largest wetland areas were re-delineated as their
boundaries appeared to have changed. The methods and results of this delineation are included in the
following sections.
METHODS
Prior to preparation of this aquatic resource delineation report, pertinent background information was
reviewed, individuals familiar with the project were interviewed, and maps, aerial photos, and soil map unit
descriptions of the project area were obtained by Western Bionomics. Wetlands were delineated on the
parcel by Western Bionomics on October 3-6, 2022.
Western Bionomics Inc. Natural Resource Management Services Page 3
Spring Valley Ranch Aquatic Resource Delineation March 1, 2023
Since there are no plans to impact wetlands in the hay meadow south of County Road 115, there was no
new delineation conducted at that location. Rather, the site was observed from multiple locations; wetlands
appear similar to that which was mapped in 2006 and that is the mapping reproduced in this report.
Similarly, Landis Creek was evaluated along its entire length for presence or absence of wetland character;
wetlands were not formally delineated since the Conceptual Plan would only impact limited reaches of the
creek for road crossings.
Hopkins Reservoir was also examined in 2022; there are no wetlands associated with the Reservoir, most
likely due to the constantly fluctuating shoreline as the reservoir fills and empties.
My delineation focused on the unnamed perennial stream and springs on the Middle Bench. Sample plots
were established near the edge of each change in plant community type in order to ascertain whether the
site was a wetland or upland. Each sample plot was numbered and designated with flagging. Ecosystem
parameters (vegetation, soils, and hydrology) were characterized and recorded on field data forms at each
observation point, as per Army Corps guidelines (US Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual, 1987; Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western
Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2010).
Based on observations of all three wetland parameters at each sample plot, wetland boundaries were
designated with fluorescent pink flagging. Boundary markers were individually numbered by Western
Bionomics and recorded by the surveyor to provide reference.
A point-to-point survey of the delineated boundaries of each wetland was conducted by Western Bionomics
using a sub-meter Garmin GeoXT datalogger, relative to the Colorado State Plane datum. The surveyed
aquatic resource boundaries were overlaid on a 2019 geo-referenced aerial photograph registered on the
Colorado State Plane datum. The map is located in Appendix A. The characteristics of vegetation, soils,
and hydrology within wetlands and uplands on the parcel are presented in Section 4 of this report.
RESULTS
Wetland sample plots at wetlands associated with the unnamed Middle Bench stream revealed the boundary
between sites which exhibited all 3 wetland parameters and sites which were lacking one or more wetland
parameters. Based on the presence or absence of parameters, wetland boundaries were designated. A total
of 3.05 acres of palustrine emergent herbaceous wetlands were delineated along the Middle Bench
stream. Additionally, the 2006 delineation documented 69.5 acres of palustrine emergent herbaceous
wetlands in the hay meadow below County Road 115. Finally, wetlands are present along Landis
Creek that were not delineated. Based on the documented correspondence with the Corps that has
occurred with prior projects, a 3-mile reach of Landis Creek is jurisdictional from its headwater to
Shaky Lake. Below Shaky Lake, there are no jurisdictional waters.
5.1 AQUATIC RESOURCES
5.1.1 Overview
Aquatic resources mapped within the assessment area exhibit the characteristics set forth in Environmental
Laboratory (1987) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2010). Wetlands along Landis Creek are
predominately PSS wetlands dominated by speckled alder, willow, twinberry honeysuckle, and hawthorn
with an understory of hydrophytic grasses and forbs. The adjacent uplands are dominated by chokecherry,
aspen, and Engelmann spruce with an understory of grasses and forbs.
Western Bionomics Inc. Natural Resource Management Services Page 4
Spring Valley Ranch Aquatic Resource Delineation March 1, 2023
The Middle Bench stream is a densely vegetated PEM wetland dominated by beaked sedge (Carex
utriculata, Nebraska sedge (Carex nebrascensis), spreading bentgrass (Agrostis stolonifera), and a few
pockets of cattail (Typha latifolia). Sites mapped as wetland exhibit the presence of all 3 wetland
parameters (hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soil, and wetland hydrology). Wetland boundaries were
delineated where one or more wetland parameters were not observed in wetland sample plots.
Representative photographs are included in Appendix B.
Table 1. AQUATIC RESOURCES WITHIN THE SURVEY AREA
Aquatic Resource Name Aquatic Resources Classification Aquatic
Resource Size
(acre)
Aquatic Resource
Size (linear feet) Cowardin Location (lat/long)
Hopkins Reservoir Open Water 39.532173°, -107.207787° Variable NA
Landis Creek PSS 39.524490°, -107.220875° Unknown 3 miles
Hopkins Homestead Wetland PEM 39.507676°, -107.210691° 1.25 ac NA
Middle Bench Stream PEM 39.510130°, -107.214735° 2.69 1.3 miles
The following sections provide details relative to physical characteristics present within the
assessment area.
5.1.2 Physical Characteristics
5.1.2.1 Soils
Soil survey information compiled by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) identifies 17
mapping unit(s) within the limits of the project area (Table 2). Soils highlighted in blue are included on the
NRCS list of hydric soils. NRCS Custom Soil Report including the Soil Map is included in Appendix D.
Table 2. SPRING VALLEY RANCH SOIL MAP UNITSA
Map Unit
Symbol Map Unit Name Acres
in AOI
Percent of
AOI
7 Almy loam, 12 to 25 percent slopes 1.8 0.0%
10 Anvik-Skylick-Sligting association, 10 to 25 percent slopes 256.3 4.2%
11 Anvik-Skylick-Sligting association, 25 to 50 percent slopes 1,018.7 16.7%
12 Arle-Ansari-Rock outcrop complex, 12 to 50 percent slopes 557.3 9.1%
18 Cochetopa-Antrobus association, 12 to 25 percent slopes 664.2 10.9%
19 Cochetopa-Antrobus association, 25 to 50 percent slopes 652.6 10.7%
34 Empedrado loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes 196.6 3.2%
35 Empedrado loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes 308.0 5.0%
48 Fughes stony loam, 3 to 12 percent slopes 109.6 1.8%
49 Goslin fine sandy loam, 3 to 6 percent slopes 24.6 0.4%
64 Jerry loam, 25 to 65 percent slopes 1,237.7 20.2%
Western Bionomics Inc. Natural Resource Management Services Page 5
Spring Valley Ranch Aquatic Resource Delineation March 1, 2023
Table 2. SPRING VALLEY RANCH SOIL MAP UNITSA
Map Unit
Symbol Map Unit Name Acres
in AOI
Percent of
AOI
69 Kilgore silt loam 89.7 1.5%
72 Kobar silty clay loam, 12 to 25 percent slopes 13.3 0.2%
87 Morval-Tridell complex, 12 to 50 percent slopes 86.5 1.4%
94 Showalter-Morval complex, 5 to 15 percent slopes 11.0 0.2%
95 Showalter-Morval complex, 15 to 25 percent slopes 874.9 14.3%
120 Water 12.1 0.2%
Totals for Area of Interest 6,115.8 100.0%
A Rows Highlighted in Blue are included on the NRCS List of Hydric Soils for Garfield County.
5.1.2.2 Vegetation
Within the boundaries of the assessment area, hydrophytic vegetation was dominant within delineated
wetlands. Hydrophytic vegetation was not observed to be dominant outside the wetland boundary. The
dominant plant associations can be broadly characterized as follows:
• Uplands dominated by mountain shrublands, aspen woodlands, mixed conifer forest, and irrigated
pasture.
• PSS wetlands dominated by speckled alder, willow, twinberry honeysuckle, and hawthorn with an
understory of hydrophytic grasses and forbs.
• PEM wetlands dominated by beaked sedge (Carex utriculata), Nebraska sedge (Carex
nebrascensis), spreading bentgrass (Agrostis stolonifera), and a few pockets of cattail (Typha
latifolia).
A list of vegetation found in the assessment area and its wetland indicator status can be found in Appendix
C. Vegetation on the assessment area is characteristic of that which is found on similar landscapes in Pitkin
and Garfield Counties.
5.1.2.3 Hydrology
The majority of the precipitation that falls on Spring Valley Ranch ends up seeping into the aquifer via
highly permeable fractured basalt flows, basalt talus, and colluvium comprised of granular soil and rock.
Most of the water on SVR never makes it to the Roaring Fork River. Landis Creek flows are entirely
diverted for agriculture well above Shaky Lake. Surface runoff is demonstrably low, as evidenced by
drainages along CR 115, where many of the natural drainage swales crossed by the road do not have culverts
and do not have the appearance of areas that transport or pond water. It is reported, by longtime residents
of the area, that only on occasions of extremely high snow melt or cloud burst, does flooding of the road
occur. Even the unnamed Middle Bench stream flow disappears prior to exiting the property.
The 100-year floodplain at the location of the project area has not been mapped by FEMA. Therefore, the
project area is not located within the limits of the 100-year floodplain.
Saturation within the root zone, inundation of the sample site, presence of one primary or 2 or more
secondary hydrological indicators was confirmed in all sample plots located in areas mapped as wetland.
Western Bionomics Inc. Natural Resource Management Services Page 6
Spring Valley Ranch Aquatic Resource Delineation March 1, 2023
5.1.3 Interstate or Foreign Commerce
No interstate or foreign commerce was observed to be associated with aquatic resources found on the site,
specifically recreation or other use by interstate or foreign travelers, sale of fish or shellfish in interstate or
foreign commerce or use by industries operating in interstate or foreign commerce, was observed or
documented.
AQUATIC RESOURCE DELINEATION
SUMMARY
A total of 3.05 acres of palustrine emergent herbaceous wetlands were delineated along the Middle Bench
stream. Additionally, the 2006 delineation documented 69.5 acres of palustrine emergent herbaceous
wetlands in the hay meadow below County Road 115. Finally, wetlands are present along Landis Creek
that were not delineated. Based on the documented correspondence with the Corps that has occurred with
prior projects, a 3-mile reach of Landis Creek is jurisdictional from its headwater to Shaky Lake. Below
Shaky Lake, there are no jurisdictional waters. Surface runoff is demonstrably low, as evidenced by
drainages along CR 115, where many of the natural drainage swales crossed by the road do not have culverts
and do not have the appearance of areas that transport or pond water. It is reported, by longtime residents
of the area, that only on occasions of extremely high snow melt or cloud burst, does flooding of the road
occur. Even the unnamed Middle Bench stream flow disappears prior to exiting the property. The 100-
year floodplain at the location of the project area has not been mapped by FEMA.
PROPOSED PROJECT
The Applicant is seeking an amendment to the approved Spring Valley Ranch PUD to establish a new PUD
Plan Map and PUD Guide to govern all future development of the property. This amendment is necessitated
to bring the plan forward to modern standards using contemporary planning practices while better
conforming to Garfield County’s current Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives.
Western Bionomics Inc. Natural Resource Management Services Page 7
Spring Valley Ranch Aquatic Resource Delineation March 1, 2023
REFERENCES
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-
87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss.
Leisure, B. 2006. Wetland Delineation for Spring Valley Ranch, US Army Corps File Number 199875502.
Worley Parsons Komex, Golden, CO. On file at Western Bionomics, Steamboat Springs, CO.
Lichvar, R.W. and S.M. McColley. 2008. A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water
Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States: A Delineation Manual.
ERDC/CRREL TR-08-12. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Cold Regions
Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, NH.
Mersel, M.K. and R.W. Lichvar. 2014. A Guide to Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) Delineation for
Non-Perennial Streams in the Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region of the United States.
ERDC/CRREL TR-14-13. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Cold Regions
Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, NH.
Riley, D.T. 2005. Regulatory Guidance Letter No. 05-05. Ordinary High Water Mark Identification.
http://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/Civil-Works/Regulatory-Program-and-Permits/Guidance-Letters/.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. Soil Data Access Hydric Soils List. Available on the web
at https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcseprd1316620.html [accessed May 18,
2017].
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0), ed. J. S. Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar,
and C. V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-3. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development
Center.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2020. National Wetland Plant List, version 3.5. http://wetland-
plants.usace.army.mil. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Engineer Research and Development Center Cold
Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, NH.
Western Bionomics Inc. Natural Resource Management Services
APPENDIX A – AQUATIC RESOURCE
DELINEATION MAP
AGRICULTURAL
OAK SHRUBLAND
OAK SHRUBLAND
OAK SHRUBLAND
OAK SHRUBLAND
OAK SHRUBLAND
AGRICULTURAL
AGRICULTURAL
AGRICULTURAL
AGRICULTURAL
MEADOW
MEADOW
MEAD
O
W
MEADOW
SAGEBRUSH
Sage
MEADOW
SPRUCE - FIR
SPRUCE - FIR - ASPEN
SPRUCE - FIR
ASPEN - FIR
ASPEN FOREST
FIR
ASPEN FOREST
SAGEBRUSH
AGRICULTURAL
AGR
I
C
U
L
T
U
R
A
L
AGRICULTURAL
SPRING VALLEY
RANCH
AQUATIC RESOURCES
0
1" =
Horizontal Scale
2000'
2000'4000'1000'2000'
LANDIS
CR
E
E
K
MIDDLE BENCH DIVERSION
HOPKINS
HOMESTEAD
AND WETLAND
M
I
D
D
L
E
B
E
N
C
H
C
R
E
E
K
C
R
1
1
5
WETLAND
STOCK/IRRIGATION POND
IRRIGATION
DITCH (TYP)
HOPKINS
RESERVOIR
SHAKY LAKE
LEGEND
WETLAND
STREAM
IRRIGATION DITCH
POND
SHEET
DRAWNBYDATE
Western Bionomics Inc. Natural Resource Management Services
APPENDIX B – PHOTOGRAPHS
Western Bionomics Inc. Natural Resource Management Services
Landis Creek Below Shaky Lake. No wetland. Landis Creek Diversion.
Livestock pond that collects the majority of the Landis Creek Diversion
Western Bionomics Inc. Natural Resource Management Services
Middle Creek Bench Stream and Wetland
One of the headwater drainages for the Middle Bench Stream
Western Bionomics Inc. Natural Resource Management Services
Another Middle Bench Wetland
Hopkins Reservoir
Western Bionomics Inc. Natural Resource Management Services
APPENDIX C – PLANT LIST
Western Bionomics Inc. Natural Resource Management Services
Table 2. List of Plants on the Property, including Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast
wetland indicator status A
Accepted
Symbol Scientific Name Common Name
Wetland Indicator
Status
WMVC
Region
AW
Region
ABLA Abies lasiocarpa Subalpine Fir FACU FACU
ACGL Acer glabrum Rocky Mountain Maple FACU FAC
ACMI2 Achillea millefolium Common Yarrow FACU FACU
AGCR Agropyron cristatum Crested Wheatgrass ------- -------
AGST2 Agrostis stolonifera Spreading Bent FAC FACW
ALIN2 Alnus incana Speckled Alder FACW FACW
AMAL2 Amelanchier alnifolia Saskatoon Service-Berry FACU FACU
ANCO Anthemis cotula Stinking Chamomile FACU
ARCO9 Arnica cordifolia Heart-leaf Arnica -----
BRCI2 Bromus ciliatus Fringed Brome FAC FAC
BRIN2 Bromus inermis Smooth Brome FAC FACU
BRMA4 Bromus marginatus Mountain Brome -----
CAAQ Carex aquatilis Water Sedge OBL OBL
CANE2 Carex nebrascensis Nebraska Sedge OBL OBL
CARO6 Carex rostrata Swollen Beaked Sedge OBL OBL
CAUT Carex utriculata Northwest Territory Sedge OBL OBL
CIAR4 Cirsium arvense Canadian Thistle FAC FACU
CRER Crataegus erythropoda Cerro Hawthorn FACU FAC
ELGL Elymus glaucus Blue Wild Rye FACU FACU
FRVI Fragaria virginiana Virginia Strawberry FACU FACU
GERI Geranium richardsonii White Crane's-Bill FAC FACU
JUAR2 Juncus arcticus Arctic Rush FACW FACW
JUCO2 Juncus confusus Colorado Rush FAC FAC
LOIN5 Lonicera involucrata Four-Line Honeysuckle FAC FAC
MAAQ2 Mahonia aquifolium Holly-Leaf Oregon-Grape FACU UPL
PASM Pascopyrum smithii Western-Wheat Grass FACU FAC
PHPR3 Phleum pratense Common Timothy FAC FACU
PIEN Picea engelmannii Engelmann's Spruce FAC FACU
PICO Pinus contorta Lodgepole Pine FAC FAC
POCO Poa compressa Flat-Stem Blue Grass FACU FACU
POPR Poa pratensis Kentucky Blue Grass FAC FAC
POAN3 Populus angustifolia Narrow-Leaf Cottonwood FACW FACW
POTR5 Populus tremuloides Quaking Aspen FACU FACU
PODI2 Potentilla diversifolia Mountain-Meadow Cinquefoil FACU FACU
Western Bionomics Inc. Natural Resource Management Services
Table 2. List of Plants on the Property, including Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast
wetland indicator status A
Accepted
Symbol Scientific Name Common Name
Wetland Indicator
Status
WMVC
Region
AW
Region
PRVI Prunus virginiana Choke Cherry FACU FAC
PSME Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-Fir FACU FACU
ROWO Rosa woodsii Woods' Rose FACU FACU
SAME2 Salix melanopsis Dusky Willow OBL OBL
SASC Salix scouleriana Scouler's Willow FAC FAC
SOCA Solidago canadensis Canada Goldenrod FACU* FACU*
SYAL Symphoricarpos albus Common Snowberry FACU UPL
TAOF Taraxacum officinale Common Dandelion FACU FACW
THFE Thalictrum fendleri Fendler's Meadow-Rue FAC FAC
TRPR2 Trifolium pratense Red Clover FACU OBL
TYLA Typha latifolia Broad-Leaf Cat-Tail OBL FACU
A U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2020. National Wetland Plant List, version 3.5. http://wetland-plants.usace.army.mil/
Western Bionomics Inc. Natural Resource Management Services
APPENDIX D – NRCS SOIL REPORT
United States
Department of
Agriculture
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Aspen-Gypsum Area,
Colorado, Parts of Eagle,
Garfield, and Pitkin
Counties; and Flat Tops
Area, Colorado, Parts of
Eagle, Garfield, Moffat, Rio
Blanco, and Routt Counties
Spring Valley Ranch
Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
November 14, 2022
9
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
43
7
2
0
0
0
43
7
3
0
0
0
43
7
4
0
0
0
43
7
5
0
0
0
43
7
6
0
0
0
43
7
7
0
0
0
43
7
8
0
0
0
43
7
9
0
0
0
43
8
0
0
0
0
43
7
2
0
0
0
43
7
3
0
0
0
43
7
4
0
0
0
43
7
5
0
0
0
43
7
6
0
0
0
43
7
7
0
0
0
43
7
8
0
0
0
43
7
9
0
0
0
43
8
0
0
0
0
306000 307000 308000 309000 310000 311000 312000
306000 307000 308000 309000 310000 311000 312000
39° 33' 22'' N
10
7
°
1
5
'
4
1
'
'
W
39° 33' 22'' N
10
7
°
1
0
'
5
8
'
'
W
39° 28' 31'' N
10
7
°
1
5
'
4
1
'
'
W
39° 28' 31'' N
10
7
°
1
0
'
5
8
'
'
W
N
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84
0 2000 4000 8000 12000Feet
0 500 1000 2000 3000Meters
Map Scale: 1:43,700 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet.
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
7 Almy loam, 12 to 25 percent
slopes
1.8 0.0%
10 Anvik-Skylick-Sligting
association, 10 to 25 percent
slopes
256.3 4.2%
11 Anvik-Skylick-Sligting
association, 25 to 50 percent
slopes
1,018.7 16.7%
12 Arle-Ansari-Rock outcrop
complex, 12 to 50 percent
slopes
557.3 9.1%
18 Cochetopa-Antrobus
association, 12 to 25 percent
slopes
664.2 10.9%
19 Cochetopa-Antrobus
association, 25 to 50 percent
slopes
652.6 10.7%
34 Empedrado loam, 2 to 6
percent slopes
196.6 3.2%
35 Empedrado loam, 6 to 12
percent slopes
308.0 5.0%
48 Fughes stony loam, 3 to 12
percent slopes
109.6 1.8%
49 Goslin fine sandy loam, 3 to 6
percent slopes
24.6 0.4%
64 Jerry loam, 25 to 65 percent
slopes
1,237.7 20.2%
69 Kilgore silt loam 89.7 1.5%
72 Kobar silty clay loam, 12 to 25
percent slopes
13.3 0.2%
87 Morval-Tridell complex, 12 to 50
percent slopes
86.5 1.4%
94 Showalter-Morval complex, 5 to
15 percent slopes
11.0 0.2%
95 Showalter-Morval complex, 15
to 25 percent slopes
874.9 14.3%
120 Water 12.1 0.2%
Subtotals for Soil Survey Area 6,114.8 100.0%
Totals for Area of Interest 6,115.8 100.0%
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
9 Anvik, warm-Cochetopa-Passar
complex, 3 to 25 percent
slopes
1.0 0.0%
Custom Soil Resource Report
12
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
Subtotals for Soil Survey Area 1.0 0.0%
Totals for Area of Interest 6,115.8 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the
soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along
with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the
landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the
characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some
observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without
including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made
up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor
components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the
map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called
noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a
particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different
management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They
generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the
scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas
are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a
given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit
descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor
components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not
mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it
was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and
miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the
usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate
pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or
landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The
delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however,
onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous
areas.
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.
Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil
properties and qualities.
Custom Soil Resource Report
13
Spring Valley Ranch Impact Analysis May 24, 2024
APPENDIX B – WILDLIFE BASELINE
CONDITIONS AND MITIGATION PLAN
SPRING VALLEY RANCH WILDLIFE
BASELINE CONDITIONS & MITIGATION PLAN
Garfield County
May 24, 2024
Prepared For
Community Development Department
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
and
9875 N. Tuhaye Park Drive
Kamas, UT 84036
WESTERN BIONOMICS INC
Natural Resource Management Services
31040 Willow Lane • Steamboat Springs, CO 80487
970-846-8223 • kscolfer@westernbionomics.com
Spring Valley Ranch Wildlife Baseline Conditions & Mitigation Plan May 24, 2024
Page i
1.INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................ 1
2.CONCEPTUAL PLAN ....................................................................................................................................... 2
2.1 ZONE DISTRICTS ....................................................................................................................................................... 2
2.2 OPEN SPACE ZONE DISTRICTS ..................................................................................................................................... 3
2.2.1 Open Space Golf District (OSG) .............................................................................................................. 3
2.2.2 Open Space Recreation District (OSR) .................................................................................................... 3
2.2.3 Open Space Limited District (OSL) .......................................................................................................... 3
2.3 OVERLAY AREAS ...................................................................................................................................................... 3
2.3.1 Wildlife Habitat Reserves ....................................................................................................................... 3
2.3.2 Public Access Areas ................................................................................................................................ 5
3.VEGETATION COVER TYPES ........................................................................................................................... 5
3.1 HIGHER ELEVATION PLATEAU ..................................................................................................................................... 5
3.2 MIDDLE ELEVATION SLOPES AND BENCHES ................................................................................................................... 5
3.3 LANDIS CREEK AND MINOR EPHEMERAL GULCHES .......................................................................................................... 7
4.WILDLIFE HABITAT ........................................................................................................................................ 7
4.1 FEDERAL AND STATE-LISTED SPECIES ............................................................................................................................ 7
4.2 COLORADO PARKS AND WILDLIFE SPECIES ACTIVITY MAPPING AND HIGH PRIORITY HABITAT .................................................. 8
4.2.1 Elk .......................................................................................................................................................... 9
4.2.2 Mule Deer ............................................................................................................................................ 11
4.2.3 Black Bear ............................................................................................................................................ 11
4.2.4 Raptors ................................................................................................................................................. 11
4.2.5 Other Wildlife Species .......................................................................................................................... 13
5.DEVELOPMENT ISSUES ................................................................................................................................ 13
5.1 DEVELOPMENT IN ELK WINTER RANGE ....................................................................................................................... 13
5.2 DEVELOPMENT IN ELK PRODUCTION RANGE ................................................................................................................ 14
5.3 DEVELOPMENT IN MULE DEER WINTER RANGE AND WINTER CONCENTRATION AREA ......................................................... 14
5.4 RECREATION CONFLICTS IN ELK AND MULE DEER WINTER RANGE ................................................................................... 14
5.5 GAME DAMAGE CONFLICTS ..................................................................................................................................... 15
5.6 BLACK BEAR .......................................................................................................................................................... 15
6.WILDLIFE MITIGATION OBJECTIVES: ........................................................................................................... 15
7.WILDLIFE IMPACT AVOIDANCE, MINIMIZATION, & MITIGATION PLAN ....................................................... 16
7.1 WILDLIFE IMPACT AVOIDANCE MEASURES .................................................................................................................. 16
7.1.1 Designated Open Space ....................................................................................................................... 16
7.1.2 Production Range ................................................................................................................................. 16
7.1.3 Winter Range ....................................................................................................................................... 17
7.1.4 Designation of Landis Creek Wildlife Corridor ..................................................................................... 17
7.1.5 Avoidance of Impacts to Active Raptor Nests ...................................................................................... 17
7.2 WILDLIFE IMPACT MINIMIZATION ............................................................................................................................. 17
7.2.1 Designation of Maximum Lot Coverage Ratios .................................................................................... 17
7.2.2 Designation of Maximum Lawn and Irrigated Landscaping Size ......................................................... 17
7.2.3 Landscaping and Lighting .................................................................................................................... 18
7.2.4 Fencing ................................................................................................................................................. 18
7.2.5 Trails .................................................................................................................................................... 18
7.2.6 Seasonal Access and Use Restrictions .................................................................................................. 18
7.2.7 Garbage, Trash, Compost, Containers, BBQ Grills ............................................................................... 18
7.2.8 Pet Control Restrictions ........................................................................................................................ 19
7.2.9 Wildlife Damage .................................................................................................................................. 19
7.2.10 Wildlife Feeding ................................................................................................................................... 19
7.2.11 Golf Course and Open Space Management ......................................................................................... 19
Spring Valley Ranch Wildlife Baseline Conditions & Mitigation Plan May 24, 2024
Page ii
7.2.12 Tree and Native Shrub Preservation .................................................................................................... 20
7.2.13 Weed Control ....................................................................................................................................... 20
7.2.14 Residential Landscaped Areas.............................................................................................................. 20
7.2.15 Security Enforcement ........................................................................................................................... 21
7.3 MITIGATION .......................................................................................................................................................... 21
7.3.1 Designation of Wildlife Habitat Reserves............................................................................................. 21
7.3.1.1 Northern Habitat Reserve ................................................................................................................................... 21
7.3.1.2 Spring Valley Wildlife Habitat Reserve ................................................................................................................ 21
7.3.2 Establishment of the Spring Valley Wildlife Trust ................................................................................ 21
7.3.2.1 Establishment ...................................................................................................................................................... 21
7.3.2.2 Purpose and Use of Transfer Assessments ......................................................................................................... 21
8.AMENDMENT AND ENFORCEMENT ............................................................................................................ 22
9.ENDORSEMENT ........................................................................................................................................... 22
10.ASSIGNMENT ......................................................................................................................................... 22
11.SIGNATURE PAGE ................................................................................................................................... 23
APPENDIX A ......................................................................................................................................................... 24
Spring Valley Ranch Wildlife Baseline Conditions & Mitigation Plan May 24, 2024
Page 1
1.INTRODUCTION
This report presents the baseline conditions of wildlife habitat on Spring Valley Ranch, describes the
impacts of proposed development on those habitats and the wildlife species that use them, and presents a
plan to avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts to the degree practicable given the purpose and logistics of
the proposed development.
Spring Valley Ranch is located southeast of Glenwood Springs in unincorporated Garfield County. The
Ranch occupies 5908.43± acres in T6S, R88W, portions of Sections 14-16, 20-23, 26-29, & 32-34, at
39.516383°, -107.215993°. The property is comprised of 4 Garfield County parcels, identified as PINs
218720100168, 218716100169, 218733100152, & 218726200168. Elevation ranges from 6893’ MSL in
the lower elevation pasturelands, up to 9460’ MSL at the northern property boundary atop the southern
flank of Glenwood Canyon.
The parcel drains to the south predominately by Landis Creek but also by an unnamed perennial steam that
disappears into the ground prior to leaving the southern property boundary. Vegetation cover types
dominating the property include irrigated pasture grasses, herbaceous emergent wetland, sagebrush
shrubland, mountain shrubland, Gambel oak woodland, mountain grassland, aspen forest, mixed conifer
forest, and riparian shrubland along portions of Landis Creek.
The property has been subject to at least two prior development proposals, neither of which ever reached
fruition. Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) has also studied and managed wildlife resources on the parcel
inalignment with CPW’s mission (Danielle Neumann, CPW, personal correspondence). As a consequence,
wildlife resources have been well-documented over the years. Prior studies include Pettersen (2007)1,
Crockett (2000)2, and Baumann (1998)3. These reports all addressed the baseline conditions of the
property, potential impacts to wildlife and wildlife habitats, and recommended mitigation measures to
accompany the development plans. These reports all provide extensive details regarding the dominant plant
communities on the site, are incorporated by reference, and summarized in the following sections.
This WMP is organized according to specific habitat and wildlife issues. Where mitigation measures apply
to more than one issue, they are discussed only once under the most appropriate issue.
1 Pettersen, Eric. 2007. Wildlife Assessment Report for the Spring Valley Ranch. March 2007. Rocky Mountain Ecological
Services, Inc. Redstone, CO. On file at Western Bionomics, Steamboat Springs, CO.
2 Crockett, Allen. March 10, 2000. Wildlife Use, Impacts, and Mitigation, Spring Valley Ranch PUD. Shepherd Miller, Inc.,
Fort Colins, CO. On file at Western Bionomics, Steamboat Springs, CO.
3 Baumann, Timothy G. 1998. Wildlife Impact Assessment Report for Spring Valley Ranch Property. Western Consulting
Group. On file at Western Bionomics, Steamboat Springs, CO.
Spring Valley Ranch Wildlife Baseline Conditions & Mitigation Plan May 24, 2024
Page 2
2.CONCEPTUAL PLAN
Storied Development is seeking an amendment to the approved Spring Valley Ranch PUD to establish a
new PUD Plan Map and PUD Guide to govern all future development of the property. This amendment is
necessitated to bring the plan forward to modern standards using contemporary planning practices while
better conforming to Garfield County’s current Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives. Some of the
Applicant’s prioritized goals for this amendment are to maintain the same density in a more compact and
clustered format, provide double the amount of open space, provide significant publicly accessible
amenities, provide protected wildlife areas, and to provide a substantial number of deed-restricted
Community Housing units for residents of Garfield County. This proposed amendment accomplishes these
goals while significantly reducing required infrastructure and the overall footprint on the land.
The proposed amendment incorporates substantial modifications to arrive at a much more desirable land
plan. The Conceptual Plan (Figure 1) maintains the approved density of 577 units in a more clustered format
while increasing the amount of Open Space by 100% (now a minimum of 3,249 acres), providing a
minimum of 450 acres of publicly accessible Open Space, providing a new public trailhead and 10 miles
of new public trails, providing 1320 acres of Wildlife Habitat Reserves that overlie certain open space
districts, and conforming to the Residential Low (RL) density Comprehensive Plan designation of 1
dwelling unit per 10.2 acres. Open space will be operated and maintained by the Spring Valley Ranch
Master Association (SVRMA). The golf course and ski area will be operated by a membership club as a
separate entity; however, during elk production season, May 15-June 30, the ski area will be managed
according to the Wildlife Habitat Reserve requirements and Wildlife Mitigation Plan. The northwestern
Wildlife Habitat Reserve will be seasonally closed to access each December 1 through April 30 (excepting
the ski area portion) to provide security for elk during the winter.
The Spring Valley Ranch PUD shall be comprised of nine Zone Districts that are intended to provide for
the comprehensive compatibility of allowed land uses and development standards.
2.1 ZONE DISTRICTS
A Zoning Plan shall be provided at the time of each subdivision Preliminary Plan application to Garfield
County. The Zoning Plan shall indicate the intended Zone District of each Lot or parcel of land subject to
the subdivision Preliminary Plan. Subsequently, at the time of each subdivision Final Plat filing, each Lot
or parcel of land subject to the Plat shall be assigned one of the following Zone Districts by the Developer
consistent with the Zoning Plan approved with the applicable subdivision Preliminary Plan. Zone Districts
shall be clearly labeled or indicated for each Lot or parcel shown on the Plat.
An excerpt from the PUD Guide is included in Appendix A, describing all of the Zone Districts and intended
uses. Approximate Zone District acreage is disclosed in Table 2 in Appendix A. It is important to note
that Zone District acreages and locations cited in this Conceptual Plan are estimated. Per Section 4 of the
Spring Valley Ranch PUD Guide, Zone Districts shall be assigned at the time of Preliminary Plan and Final
Plat applications to Garfield County. In other words, the specific boundaries and locations of Open Space
Zone Districts are subject to change as the project progresses through to Final Plat. However, SVR has
committed to establishing a minimum of 3,249 acres of Open Space, and that total acreage will not change.
Since the Open Space Districts are particularly applicable to the discussion of wildlife habitat and mitigation
actions, a summary of these districts is included below.
Spring Valley Ranch Wildlife Baseline Conditions & Mitigation Plan May 24, 2024
Page 3
For reference, the Notes displayed in the lower left of the Conceptual Plan (Figure 1) call out the Open
Space Districts (Notes 12 and 18). The areas corresponding to these notes are called out in the Conceptual
Plan.
2.2 OPEN SPACE ZONE DISTRICTS
2.2.1 Open Space Golf District (OSG)
The Open Space Golf District is intended to allow for one eighteen (18) hole golf course, one short golf
course, and one golf driving range and other practice facilities such as a putting green and practice chipping
area. This Zone District is also intended to allow for various supporting uses and structures such as cart
storage; comfort stations; concessions; parking; pathways and trails; ponds; and other customary accessory
uses and facilities.
2.2.2 Open Space Recreation District (OSR)
The Open Space Recreation District is intended to allow for facilities and services related to supporting
active and passive recreation uses, such as trails; trailheads; sport courts; sport fields; fishing and boating;
winter recreation uses and facilities; parks; event facilities; community buildings; interpretative facilities;
and other accessory uses or facilities.
2.2.3 Open Space Limited District (OSL)
The Open Space Limited District is intended to prioritize land preservation with minimal improvements or
uses. Lands within this Zone District may be adjacent to public lands outside of the PUD, providing
buffering to those public lands. Recreational uses within this Zone District are intended to be non-
mechanized and may include trails for non-mechanized recreation. Intermittent mechanized maintenance,
forestry and wildfire management activities will be allowed.
2.3 OVERLAY AREAS
There are two types of Overlay Areas within the PUD, neither of which shall be considered Zone Districts
or Planning Areas. The purpose of the Overlay Areas is to provide for special management of certain lands
within the PUD as described below, and as shown on the PUD Plan Map.
2.3.1 Wildlife Habitat Reserves
The PUD shall include two (2) designated Wildlife Habitat Reserves consisting of a minimum of 1,320
total acres. These Wildlife Habitat Reserves are designated on the PUD Plan Map in Planning Areas A, B,
G and H.
Both Wildlife Habitat Reserves will be seasonally closed to access each December 1 through April 30
(excepting the ski area portion) to provide security for elk during the winter and will also be closed to access
each May 15 through June 30 to provide secure habitat during elk calving season. Because the Emergency
Vehicle Access in the Northwestern Wildlife Habitat Reserve needs to remain accessible during the winter,
snow removal on this road will be allowed.
Additionally, the Developer shall work with Colorado Parks & Wildlife to commence a restoration project
within the Southwestern Wildlife Habitat Reserve to improve cover and forage for elk during the winter
and calving seasons.
C:\Users\Kelly\Documents\AKC\Western Bionomics\Logo\Logo2 blue background.jpg
SPRING VALLEY
RANCH
FIGURE 1.
CONCEPTUAL PLAN
NOTES:
1) Drawing based on 05-10-24 Conceptual Plan
2) This is a conceptual plan that is intended to
illustrate one potential way the property could
be developed consistent with the proposed
PUD amendment. The final development
plans for the property may differ from this
conceptual plan, subject to the final approved
PUD Plan Map and PUD Guide.
0
1" =
Horizontal Scale
2000'
2000'4000'1000'2000'
LAN
D
I
S
CR
E
E
K
HOPKINS
RESERVOIR
HOPKINS
HOMESTEAD
AND WETLAND
M
I
D
D
L
E
B
E
N
C
H
C
R
E
E
K
Spring Valley Ranch Wildlife Baseline Conditions & Mitigation Plan May 24, 2024
Page 5
2.3.2 Public Access Areas
The PUD shall include a minimum of 450 acres of publicly accessible Open Space, including 10 miles of
single-track mechanized trails intended for hiking and mountain biking, and a public trailhead containing a
minimum of 20 parking spaces. Portions of the public access areas will be subject to seasonal closures for
the benefit of wildlife. Public access areas shall be designated on the final plat at the time the land containing
each public access area is platted.
An internal pathway system will be established around the golf course neighborhood with paved pathways
for year-round use. This will take pressure off seasonal trails located elsewhere on the property.
3. VEGETATION COVER TYPES
Crockett (2000) provided a baseline description of the dominant vegetation on the Spring Valley Ranch.
His descriptions are summarized in this section, with modifications where necessary to account for changed
conditions in 2022. The Vegetation Map is displayed in Figure 2. Elevation at Spring Valley Ranch varies
from less than 6,900 feet in the southwestern comer to more than 9,400 feet in the northeastern corner.
Because of this wide elevation range, as well as differences in soil, slope, aspect, and historic land use, the
Spring Valley Ranch supports a broad variety of habitat types.
3.1 HIGHER ELEVATION PLATEAU
The highest part of the property is an undulating plateau dominated by a mosaic of mixed conifers
(Engelmann spruce, subalpine fir, and Douglas fir), aspen, and native meadows with a fringe of mountain
big sagebrush. North facing aspects within the mosaic support dense stands of Engelmann spruce and
subalpine fir, with varying amounts of Douglas fir. At the time Crockett prepared his report, he documented
aspen stands as relatively dense, with a lush understory of native grasses and forbs. At the time of my site
visit in 2022, many of the aspen stands in this area have converted to 2-storied stands.
A large portion, perhaps up to 90% of the mature aspens have died off, fostering abundant resprouting in
the understory, creating a cohort of sapling-sized aspen approximately 12’ tall beneath the towering older
cohort of mature trees.
Portions of the open meadows are kept moist by snow accumulations and the runoff from adjacent hills and
ridges. A few small stock ponds have been created at low points in the meadows; some of the ponds have
a small wetland fringe. A larger pond, Hopkins Reservoir, was quite small at the time of my August 2022
site visit but has the capability to contain approximately 120 acre-feet at full pool. Because of a lack of a
consistent water surface elevation Hopkins Reservoir does not support wetland vegetation.
3.2 MIDDLE ELEVATION SLOPES AND BENCHES
The steep, southwest-facing slope below the upper plateau is cloaked by a dense, homogenous mountain
shrub community dominated by Gambel oak and serviceberry. This dense shrubland is broken by a few
clumps of quaking aspen along minor drainageways or seeps and larger clumps of Douglas fir in rocky
areas. In some places along the top of the slope, a zone of small, dense aspen forms a narrow transition
between the mountain shrubs and the upper plateau conifer-aspen-meadow mosaic.
AGRICULTURAL
OAK SHRUBLAND
OAK SHRUBLAND
OAK SHRUBLAND
OAK SHRUBLAND
OAK SHRUBLAND
AGRICULTURAL
AGRICULTURAL
AGRICULTURAL
AGRICULTURAL
MEADOW
MEADOW
MEAD
O
W
MEADOW
SAGEBRUSH
Sage
MEADOW
SPRUCE - FIR
SPRUCE - FIR - ASPEN
SPRUCE - FIR
ASPEN - FIR
ASPEN FOREST
FIR
ASPEN FOREST
SAGEBRUSH
AGRICULTURAL
AGR
I
C
U
L
T
U
R
A
L
AGRICULTURAL
SPRING VALLEY
RANCH
FIGURE 2.
VEGETATION
0
1" =
Horizontal Scale
2000'
2000'4000'1000'2000'
LANDIS
CR
E
E
K
MIDDLE BENCH DIVERSION
HOPKINS
HOMESTEAD
AND WETLAND
M
I
D
D
L
E
B
E
N
C
H
C
R
E
E
K
DATE DRAWNBY
SHEET
C
R
1
1
5
WETLAND
STOCK/IRRIGATION POND
IRRIGATION
DITCH (TYP)
HOPKINS
RESERVOIR
SHAKY LAKE
AGRICULTURE
ASPEN
LEGEND
COTTONWOOD
FIR
FIR-ASPEN
MEADOW
OAK SHRUBLAND
SAGEBRUSH
WETLAND
STREAM
IRRIGATION DITCH
POND
Spring Valley Ranch Wildlife Baseline Conditions & Mitigation Plan May 24, 2024
Page 7
At the base of the steep shrubby slope, nearly level benches were historically converted to agricultural use.
These former croplands have been re-seeded with native herbaceous species and are slowly converting back
to native grasslands. Left untouched, the abundant young sagebrush and rabbitbrush suggest these
meadows would eventually convert to sagebrush shrubland. Fringes of basin big sagebrush and rabbitbrush
around the non-native pastures and small grain fields suggest that the benches were dominated by these
shrubs prior to agricultural use.
Between the agricultural benches and County Road 115 is another, less extensive southwest facing
mountain shrub community dominated by Gambel oak, serviceberry, mountain mahogany, snowberry,
antelope bitterbrush, and wax currant. These slopes are punctuated by scattered individual Rocky Mountain
junipers and Douglas firs.
The slopes above the middle bench support a couple of springs, one which gives rise to the unnamed stream
that flows within a linear channel across the former wheat fields. The historic Hopkins homestead is built
adjacent to another spring which undoubtedly served as domestic water for the household.
3.4 LANDIS CREEK AND MINOR EPHEMERAL GULCHES
Landis Creek is the primary ecological connector between the higher and lower elevation habitats described
above and is one of the most important ecological features of the site. The section of the creek that drops
from the top of the plateau and across the upper portion of the expansive southwest-facing slope carries
water for most of the year as a result of a narrow, bedrock-confined gulch and input from seeps. In this
reach, Landis Creek supports a riparian community of aspen, Engelmann spruce, speckled alder, willow,
chokecherry, hawthorn, elderberry, twinberry, and a variety of lush grasses and forbs. The combination of
accessible water, lush foliage, and riparian trees and shrubs provides a preferential movement corridor for
wildlife and supports species that might not otherwise occur onsite.
The ecological value of Landis Creek is not consistent along its length. Stretches downstream from the
point where surface flows are diverted for agricultural use are dry except during major runoff events.
Because of the lack of surface flows, and less topographic shading as the gulch becomes wider, reaches of
Landis Creek below the historic diversion point do not support a distinct riparian habitat.
Minor ephemeral drainageways also dissect the lower southwest-facing slopes but, like the lower reaches
of Landis Creek, do not have sufficient water to support riparian habitat. Some of these gulches are marked
by small ribbons of aspen or clumps of Douglas-fir.
4. WILDLIFE HABITAT
4.1 FEDERAL AND STATE-LISTED SPECIES
A list of threatened and endangered species was retrieved from the US Fish & Wildlife Service’s IPaC site 4.
IPaC provides a list of species and critical habitat that may occur on a site, based on location information
provided by an applicant. The IPaC list included the following species: Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis),
4 US Fish & Wildlife Service. November 8, 2022. List of species and other resources such as critical habitat under USFWS
jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area. On file at Western Bionomics, Steamboat Springs, CO.
Spring Valley Ranch Wildlife Baseline Conditions & Mitigation Plan May 24, 2024
Page 8
Gray Wolf (Canis lupus), Yellow-Billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus), Mexican spotted owl (Strix
occidentalis lucida), Colorado pikeminnow (Ptychochelius lucius), Razorback Sucker (Xyrauchen
texanus), Humpback Chub (Gila cypha), Bonytail Chub (Gila elegans), Ute Ladies-tresses (Spiranthes
diluvialis).
Based on ocular estimations of horizontal cover present in conifer stands on SVR, Spring Valley Ranch
does not provide suitable habitat for Canada lynx foraging. Average horizontal cover observed during my
site visit was <35%. Dense horizontal cover is an important determinant of snowshoe hare presence and
abundance within lynx habitat.5 This cover may occur in both young structure and multi-storied stands,
with the latter more important to lynx during the winter period. Assessment of horizontal cover is important
in determining whether these areas are likely to provide important foraging habitat for lynx. While a
dispersing lynx may travel through the ranch, sufficient forage habitat is not present in sufficient acreage
to entice a lynx to stick around and hunt. The project does not include a predator management program
that would affect gray wolves. Yellow-billed cuckoo and Mexican spotted owl were dropped from detailed
analysis because their current distribution does not include the Spring Valley Ranch. The big river fish
were eliminated from further analysis since the project will not lead to new water depletions, water quality
degradation, or regulated flows that affect these fish. As a result of the foregoing, development at Spring
Valley Ranch will have no effect on federally listed wildlife species.
CPW lists a number of Species of Concern, State Threatened, and State Endangered Species6. The only
species that has suitable habitat within the Spring Valley Ranch is the Greater Sage Grouse (listed as a
Species of Concern). Sage grouse used to be quite common in the greater Missouri Heights area (Pettersen
2007). As the area was converted from sagebrush flats to agricultural meadows, and lately, residential
subdivisions, sage grouse have not been recently documented in the area. As a result, development of
Spring Valley Ranch will have no effect on state listed wildlife species.
4.2 COLORADO PARKS AND WILDLIFE SPECIES ACTIVITY MAPPING
AND HIGH PRIORITY HABITAT
Colorado Parks and Wildlife produces Species Activity Mapping (SAM) for a variety of species, providing
information on seasonal wildlife distributions. CPW includes the following caveats with their mapping:
“The information portrayed on these maps should not replace field studies necessary for more localized
planning efforts. The data are typically gathered at a scale of 1:24000 or 1:50000; discrepancies may
become apparent at larger scales; SAM data is a graphic representation of phenomena that are difficult to
reduce to two dimensions; animal distributions are fluid; animal populations and their habitats are
dynamic.”7 CPW SAM mapping provides an indication of general wildlife observations by District
Wildlife Managers and other CPW Biologists. The following sub-sections provide summaries of CPW
SAMs and High Priority Habitat8 (HPH) present on the SVR parcel.
5 Bertram, T. and J. Claar. 2008. Interim Guidance for Assessing Multi-storied Stands Within Lynx Habitat. USDA Forest
Service Region 1, Missoula Montana.
6 https://cpw.state.co.us/learn/Pages/SOC-ThreatenedEndangeredList.aspx
7 CPW GIS SAM Definitions Publicly Available Data. cpw.state.co.us/learn/Maps/CPW-Public-GIS-Species-Activities-
Definitions.pdf
8 High Priority Habitat - Habitat areas identified by CPW where measures to avoid, minimize, and mitigate adverse impacts to
wildlife have been identified to protect breeding, nesting, foraging, migrating, or other uses by wildlife.
www.sos.state.co.us/noticeofrulemaking
Spring Valley Ranch Wildlife Baseline Conditions & Mitigation Plan May 24, 2024
Page 9
4.2.1 Elk
Elk activities mapped on the property include summer range 9, winter range 10, winter concentration area 11,
and production area(s)12 (Figure 3). The vast majority of the SVR property is mapped by CPW as elk winter
range. Severe winter range13 is mapped on a small (<100 acres) portion of the southeastern corner of the
property. Elk using the property are managed as part of the Frying Pan River Herd (DAU E-16). The 2023
post-hunt population estimate for this herd is 9,820 animals, with a bull/cow ratio of 24 14. Both of these
parameters are above the objectives spelled out in the 2013 DAU E-16 Plan, which states a population
objective of 5,500-8,500 animals, and a bull ratio objective of 20 (CPW 2013)15. However, the E-16 calf
ratio has been declining since 1996 (CPW 2013), a sign that herd productivity is declining and a concerning
metric for wildlife managers. Elk were observed on the property in early October during my site visit.
Gambel oak and mountain shrub communities found on the property provide important winter forage
opportunities for elk. These communities and aspen stands provide forage during the remainder of the year
as well.
The dense mountain shrub community above the middle bench, in combination with several springs along
the slope provide security and water sought out by females during parturition. A total of 1,551 acres of
production range are mapped on these slopes by CPW as production range. Additionally, CPW recently
completed a revision of the Elk SAM mapping; the revision adds 521 additional production range acres
within the parcel boundary in the bottom of Spring Valley as shown in Figure 3.
Where elk calve varies from year to year depending on habitat and weather conditions. In those years when
there is snow remaining at mid to higher elevations, elk may calve at lower elevations than is reflected in
SAM mapping. In those years when there is an earlier spring green-up at higher elevations, cow elk are
likely to move into higher areas to calve. One constant is that elk cows require water within one-half mile
while calving. Security cover is notably absent in the Spring Valley lower production range polygon.
9 Elk Summer Range - That part of the range of a species where 90% of the individuals are located between spring green-up and
the first heavy snowfall.
10 Elk Winter Range - That part of the overall range of a species where 90 percent of the individuals are located during the
average five winters out of ten from the first heavy snowfall to spring green-up.
11 Elk Winter Concentration Area - That part of the winter range of elk where densities are at least 200% greater than the
surrounding winter range density during the average five winters out of ten from the first heavy snowfall to spring green-up, or
during a site-specific period of winter as defined for each Data Analysis Unit. Listed by CPW as a HPH.
12 Elk Production Area - That part of the overall range of elk occupied by the females from May 15 to June 15 for calving. Listed
by CPW as a HPH.
13 Elk Severe Winter Range - That part of the range of a species where 90 percent of the individuals are located when the annual
snowpack is at its maximum and/or temperatures are at a minimum in the two worst winters out of ten. Listed by CPW as a
HPH.
14 cpw.state.co.us/Documents/Hunting/BigGame/Statistics/Elk/2023ElkPopulationEstimates.pdf
15 CPW. 2013. Frying Pan River Elk Herd E-16 Data Analysis Unit Plan. CPW, Glenwood Springs, CO
C:\Users\Kelly\Documents\AKC\Western Bionomics\Logo\Logo2 blue background.jpg
SPRING VALLEY
RANCH
FIGURE 3. ELK RANGE
0
1" =
Horizontal Scale
2000'
2000'4000'1000'2000'
ELK PRODUCTION RANGE
ELK SEVERE WINTER RANGE
ELK WINTER RANGE SOUTH OF BLUE LINE
LAN
D
I
S
CR
E
E
K
HOPKINS
RESERVOIR
HOPKINS
HOMESTEAD
AND WETLAND
M
I
D
D
L
E
B
E
N
C
H
C
R
E
E
K
NOTES:
1) Drawing based on 05-10-24 Conceptual Plan
2) Elk range mapping per CPW SAM
12-22-2023
3) This is a conceptual plan that is intended to
illustrate one potential way the property could
be developed consistent with the proposed
PUD amendment. The final development
plans for the property may differ from this
conceptual plan, subject to the final approved
PUD Plan Map and PUD Guide.
1 ADD NEW CPW ELK PRODUCTION RANGE 4-2-2024
ELK WINTER CONCENTRATION AREA
Spring Valley Ranch Wildlife Baseline Conditions & Mitigation Plan May 24, 2024
Page 11
4.2.2 Mule Deer
Mule deer activity mapped on the property includes summer range, winter range, and a winter concentration
area16 (Figure 4). Deer on the property are managed as part of the Basalt herd, DAU D-53. The population
objective for DAU D-53 is 4,000-6,000 individuals, with a buck:doe ratio of 32-40. The 2021 post-hunt
population is estimated at 3,860 with a buck:doe ratio of 28. The most recent 3-year (2013-2015) average
fawn:doe ratio is 45 fawns per 100 does (CPW 2020)17. CPW believes that this ratio should yield a stable
population.
4.2.3 Black Bear
The Spring Valley Ranch falls within Black bear DAU B-11, located in the Roaring Fork and Eagle River
valleys. Annual bear mortality in B-11 has been increasing over the past 2 decades. The 10-year average
of annual bear mortality is 118 bears/year, and the 3-year average is 135 bears/year. Conflicts between
bears and humans are frequent, especially when natural foods are scarce and when garbage and other
human-related attractants are readily available. These conflicts are the combined result of increases in both
bear and human populations over the past several decades, increased availability of human-related food
sources, and more frequent poor natural food years. In B-11, bear conflict years are now the “new normal.”
The property is mapped as a black bear fall concentration area.18 One bear was observed during 2022 field
studies, and abundant evidence of their presence (scat, tree scarring, etc.) was observed on the property.
4.2.4 Raptors
Raptors with suitable habitat on or near the Spring Valley Ranch property include golden eagle, red-tailed
hawk, Swainson's hawk, northern goshawk, Cooper's hawk, sharp-shinned hawk, northern harrier,
American kestrel, great homed owl, long-eared owl, northern pygmy-owl, and northern saw-whet owl.
According to Crockett (2000), a golden eagle nest has been mapped by CPW on north-facing slopes of
Glenwood Canyon, slightly less than 1 mile from the northwestern corner of the Spring Valley Ranch.
Golden eagles cover large home ranges in search of prey, and it is therefore likely that onsite areas such as
meadows at higher elevations and pastures at lower elevations are visited throughout the year. Golden
eagles have anecdotally been observed hunting over the lower slopes and agricultural lands on both sides
of the county road.
Northern harriers have also been anecdotally observed hunting across the agricultural meadows southwest
of the county road during both summer and winter.
16 Mule Deer Winter Concentration Area - Defined the same as elk winter range.
17 CPW. 2020. Basalt Deer Herd Management Plan DAU D-53. CPW, Glenwood Springs, CO.
18 Black bear fall concentration area - That portion of the overall range occupied from August 15 until September 30 for the
purpose of ingesting large quantities of mast and berries to establish fat reserves for the winter hibernation period
C:\Users\Kelly\Documents\AKC\Western Bionomics\Logo\Logo2 blue background.jpg
SPRING VALLEY
RANCH
FIGURE 4. MULE
DEER RANGE
NOTES:
1) Drawing based on 04-29-24 Conceptual Plan
2) Mule Deer Range mapping per CPW SAM
12-22-2023
3) This is a conceptual plan that is intended to
illustrate one potential way the property could
be developed consistent with the proposed
PUD amendment. The final development
plans for the property may differ from this
conceptual plan, subject to the final approved
PUD Plan Map and PUD Guide.
0
1" =
Horizontal Scale
2000'
2000'4000'1000'2000'
MULE DEER WINTER CONCENTRATION AREA
MULE DEER WINTER RANGE
LAN
D
I
S
CR
E
E
K
HOPKINS
RESERVOIR
HOPKINS
HOMESTEAD
AND WETLAND
M
I
D
D
L
E
B
E
N
C
H
C
R
E
E
K
1 REVISE WINTER CONC AREA PER CPW 4-2-2024
Spring Valley Ranch Wildlife Baseline Conditions & Mitigation Plan May 24, 2024
Page 13
4.2.5 Other Wildlife Species
Additional wildlife species likely to use habitat present on Spring Valley Ranch include dusky (blue)
grouse, wild turkey,19 a broad variety of songbirds, woodpeckers, corvids, bats, and other small mammals
such as shrews, mice, voles, gophers, squirrels, and chipmunks, medium-sized mammals such as cottontail
rabbit, white-tailed jackrabbit, porcupine, marten, raccoon, red fox, coyote, bobcat, and now wolves as
CPW recently began to implement voter-mandated re-introduction. Mountain lions are likely present
during the winter as they are attracted to locations where mule deer congregate. Since the entire parcel is
within mule deer summer range, winter range, and winter concentration area, mountain lion presence is
likely.
5. DEVELOPMENT ISSUES
Adverse impacts associated with residential, golf, and winter recreation developments in areas of native
habitat include habitat loss through removal of vegetation, habitat loss through avoidance of the zone of
disturbance associated with human activity, habitat fragmentation, barriers to movement, and disturbance
or mortality from the actions of pets. During preparation of this WMP, several issues were identified as
being the most significant with regard to the development of Spring Valley Ranch and are described in
detail in the following sections. The plan presented below seeks first to avoid impacting wildlife and their
habitat. If impacts cannot be avoided, this plan provides measures to minimize wildlife habitat impacts.
Finally, if impacts cannot be avoided and have been minimized, the plan presents opportunities to mitigate
those unavoidable impacts. These primary issues related to development at Spring Valley Ranch include:
1) Direct impact to elk and deer by development and indirect impact by human recreation in winter
range.
2) Direct impact to elk by development and indirect impact by human recreation in production range.
3) Direct impact to mule deer by development and indirect impact by human recreation in winter range
and in a winter concentration area.
4) Potential game damage conflicts.
5) Black Bear/Human conflicts.
6) Mountain Lion/Human conflicts.
These issues have in large part driven the avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures presented in
the Mitigation Plan (Section 7).
5.1 DEVELOPMENT IN ELK WINTER RANGE
CPW has identified the vast majority of the Spring Valley Ranch property as elk winter range. Spring
Valley Ranch homesites and access roads located within elk winter range will directly reduce the production
of winter forage and will indirectly reduce security of winter range for elk. Domestic pets may harass the
19 Wild Turkey – Entire parcel located in SAM overall range. Northwesternmost corner identified to contain a wild turkey roost
site.
Spring Valley Ranch Wildlife Baseline Conditions & Mitigation Plan May 24, 2024
Page 14
herd when elk are in close proximity to building envelopes. Game damage is probable on ornamental trees
and shrubs unless unpalatable species are planted.
5.2 DEVELOPMENT IN ELK PRODUCTION RANGE
Elk that calve above the middle bench in the areas proposed for Mountain and Ranch neighborhoods, and
within the proposed ski area, will likely be displaced by the presence of houses and roads. As suggested
by Wait and McNally (2004)20 these animals will be expected to utilize sites farther from residential
development for calving do to the indirect impact of noise and commotion associated with occupation of
residential structures. As reported by Skovlin et al (2002)21 elk prefer habitat within ½-mile of water during
the spring, summer, and fall, and perhaps even less during lactation. Such habitats are found along the
Landis Creek corrido and in association with the spring-fed tributaries to the unnamed Middle Bench
stream. Elk that utilize the lower Spring Valley production area during calving season may be displaced in
the vicinity of the Community Housing development; howe over 500-acres within the SAM-mapped
production range would be preserved for use during elk calving season.
5.3 DEVELOPMENT IN MULE DEER WINTER RANGE AND WINTER
CONCENTRATION AREA
Similar to that of elk, the majority of Spring Valley Ranch is mapped by CPW as mule deer winter range.
Development in mule deer winter range will decrease the availability of forage within building envelopes
and potentially lead to game damage for ornamentals during the winter. The lower slopes of the ranch
immediately above CR 115 are mapped by CPW as a mule deer winter concentration area. Development
and recreation within winter range and concentration areas will have increased impacts on mule deer since,
by definition, the density of wintering deer is twice that of the surrounding winter range.
5.4 RECREATION CONFLICTS IN ELK AND MULE DEER WINTER RANGE
Winter recreation (backcountry skiing, cross country skiing, snowmobiling) in elk and mule deer winter
range (and deer winter concentration) represents potentially serious impacts to these animals since the
impacts occur when they are in a weakened condition, food supplies are low, and the ability to conserve
energy is critical to the animal’s survival. Recreationists cause a startle response in deer and elk, causing
animals to flee, requiring energy expenditures that may not be sustainable throughout the winter. The result
is decreased fitness in individuals and probable increased mortality. Studies have shown that the indirect
impact of recreation can extend for as far as 1640 yards from the loudest forms of recreation such as ATVs
and MTBs22.
In addition to winter range, spring recreation has the potential to impact elk during parturition, and year-
round recreation disturbs wildlife (Danielle Neumann, CPW, personal communication).
20 Wait, S. and H. McNally. 2004. Selection of habitats by wintering elk in a rapidly subdividing area of La Plata County,
Colorado. In Proceedings 4th International Urban Wildlife Symposium (Shaw et al., eds).
21 Skovlin, J.M., P. Zager, and B. Johnson. 2002. Elk Habitat Selectin and Evaluation. In North American Elk Ecology and
Management (D. Toweill and J.W. Thomas, eds). Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington and London.
22 Wisdom, Michael J.; Ager, Alan A.; Preisler, Haiganoush K.; Cimon, Norman J.; Johnson, Bruce K. 2004. Effects of off-road
recreation on mule deer and elk. In: Transactions of the 69th North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference: 531-
550.
Spring Valley Ranch Wildlife Baseline Conditions & Mitigation Plan May 24, 2024
Page 15
5.5 GAME DAMAGE CONFLICTS
Elk and deer cause damage by browsing on trees, shrubs, and other ornamental plantings; by feeding on
alfalfa and grass in fields, pastures, and haystacks; and by running through fences. Because Colorado
statutes require compensation to landowners for agricultural property damage by big game animals, CPW
personnel spend considerable time and effort preventing, investigating, and evaluating a variety of damage
problems each year.
Numerous preventative measures are available to minimize this conflict, including steps that can be taken
before the damage occurs. These include crop alternatives, lure crops, and changes in planting and
harvesting techniques. Other options include steps that can be taken after the damage has started, including
frightening devices, repellents, trapping, and hunting season modifications. In addition, habitat
enhancement efforts can entice elk and deer away from ornamental plantings and agricultural crops.
5.6 BLACK BEAR
Most conflicts between bears and people are linked to careless handling of food and/or garbage. Black bears
are opportunistic omnivores, and they will eat almost anything, including human food, garbage, bird food,
and pet and livestock food when available. Once a bear has found the easily accessible, consistent food
source that human settlements can offer, it may overcome its natural wariness of people and visit regularly,
increasing the chance of a human/bear encounter.
6. WILDLIFE MITIGATION OBJECTIVES:
The goal of this WMP is to avoid, minimize, and/or mitigate the impact of the development on all wildlife
species using the property. Specific objectives include:
1) Avoid or minimize wildlife impacts that would have occurred with prior development plans for
Spring Valley Ranch.
2) Provide for continued utilization of seasonal wildlife habitats on the property.
3) Preserve the Landis Creek riparian corridor.
4) Minimize physical impacts to elk production range, elk and mule deer winter range, and habitat for
other wildlife species.
5) Minimize recreational disturbance to elk using the property.
6) Minimize recreational disturbance to mule deer using the property.
7) Minimize human/wildlife conflicts by implementing homeowner occupancy and use restrictions.
8) Maintain habitat connectivity within and adjacent to Spring Valley Ranch.
9) Minimize the wildlife habitat impacts of homeowners’ amenities that include a comprehensive trail
system, golf course, and ski area.
Spring Valley Ranch Wildlife Baseline Conditions & Mitigation Plan May 24, 2024
Page 16
10) Mitigate the impact of development by establishing Wildlife Habitat Reserves, which will be
managed to maintain or enhance habitat effectiveness.
11) Mitigate the impact of development by establishment of a Real Estate Transfer Fee to provide funds
to be administered by CPW for wildlife habitat projects within CPW’s Elk Data Analysis Unit E-
16.
Avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures will be memorialized in the Master Declaration of
Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D., as amended. These measures are
presented in the following section.
7. WILDLIFE IMPACT AVOIDANCE,
MINIMIZATION, & MITIGATION PLAN
Recognizing that one of the attributes of the Spring Valley Ranch is the wildlife that occupies the area, the
development of the property has been designed to avoid impacts to wildlife habitat and to minimize
disturbances to wildlife to the extent practicable. In recognition that it is not practicable to avoid all impacts
to wildlife and its habitat, this plan includes mitigation measures designed to help offset the impact of the
development on wildlife. The terms and provisions of this Wildlife Mitigation Plan are presented in the
following sections.
7.1 WILDLIFE IMPACT AVOIDANCE MEASURES
7.1.1 Designated Open Space
The Conceptual Plan avoids direct impacts to 55% of the property by setting aside a minimum of 3,249
acres as open space (Appendix A, Table 2). Conversely, the 2017 approved Spring Valley Ranch PUD
included provisions for 1,590 acres (26.9%) of the property to remain in open space. Open space will be
operated and maintained by the Spring Valley Ranch Master Association (SVRMA).
Open Space will be organized as 3 distinct districts 23 – Open Space Golf (OSG – 260± acres estimated),
Open Space Recreational (OSR – 2511± acres estimated), and Open Space Limited (OSL - 743± acres
estimated); the total acreage of Open Space, including all 3 Open Space Districts, is therefore 3,249 acres.
All estimated Zone District acreages are displayed in Table 2 (Appendix A). Allowed uses within each of
these Open Space Districts are described in the PUD Guide and summarized in Appendix A. SVR
acknowledges that the OSG and OSR Districts will impart direct and indirect impacts to open space wildlife
habitat; however, these open space districts avoid the direct impact of residential density and will provide
habitat for wildlife, albeit of less effectiveness than that which currently exists.
7.1.2 Production Range
Recognizing that the availability of production range for elk is a key limiting factor for the Fryingpan herd,
the Development Plan avoids impact to 68% (1,047 acres) of the mapped production range on Spring Valley
Ranch. These impacts have been avoided by placing the preserved areas in designated open space and
23 All acreages are approximate and subject to change.
Spring Valley Ranch Wildlife Baseline Conditions & Mitigation Plan May 24, 2024
Page 17
including seasonal access and use restrictions to provide solitude for elk during calving seasons. Details
regarding seasonal access and use restrictions are included in Section 7.2.6.
Impacts to elk production range have been further avoided through removal of all originally proposed trails
from within CPW-mapped elk production range in the Spring Valley area south and west of CR 115.
7.1.3 Winter Range
Recognizing that the availability of winter range for elk is a key limiting factor for the Fryingpan herd, the
Development Plan has avoided impacts to 54% (3,148 acres) of the elk winter range by placing it in
designated open space, much of which has seasonal access and use restrictions. Details regarding seasonal
access and use restrictions are included in Section 7.2.6.
7.1.4 Designation of Landis Creek Wildlife Corridor
Aside from the main access road, the Conceptual Plan avoids development within the Landis Creek
corridor. The vast majority of Landis Creek is wide open, providing elevational movements across the
property and between the two Wildlife Habitat Reserves. Access roads are unavoidable at locations where
they cross or parallel Landis Creek. For the majority of the Landis Creek corridor, wildlife movements will
be facilitated by avoiding development within the Landis Creek riparian corridor.
7.1.5 Avoidance of Impacts to Active Raptor Nests
Prior to initiation of construction of infrastructure or facilities by the Declarant, Owner or Occupant, any
district, utility provider, the Golf Course, or the SVRMA, a qualified biologist will be retained by the
developer or the SVRMA to conduct a raptor nesting survey. If an active raptor nest exists on Spring Valley
Ranch, heavy outdoor construction (e.g. earth-moving and exterior house construction) shall be prohibited
within a radius of either 300 feet (if the nest is located in a conifer) or 400 feet (if the nest is located in an
aspen or cottonwood) until the young have fledged or the nest naturally fails. A typical fledgling date for
the area is July 1.
7.2 WILDLIFE IMPACT MINIMIZATION
7.2.1 Designation of Maximum Lot Coverage Ratios
Maximum lot coverage ratios are designated within each zone district (Appendix A, Table 1). These ratios
define how much of the land within each lot, by zone district, can be impacted by a residential structure.
Using these maximum lot coverage ratios, development of residential structures on the Spring Valley Ranch
will impact approximately 360 acres (Appendix A, Table 2). This number does not include land impacted
by roads, driveways, amenities, or mixed-use facilities, so the actual impacted acreage will be higher.
However, by limiting the size of dwelling units within each lot, physical impacts to wildlife habitat on each
lot will be minimized.
7.2.2 Designation of Maximum Lawn and Irrigated Landscaping Size
Impacts associated with lawns and associated irrigated landscaping will also be minimized outside the
Building Envelopes, and shall be subject to the following limitations:
1) Mountain zone district – no more than 4,000 square feet per Lot.
2) Ranch zone district – no more than 2,500 square feet per Lot.
3) Estate zone district – no more than 2,500 square feet per Lot.
Spring Valley Ranch Wildlife Baseline Conditions & Mitigation Plan May 24, 2024
Page 18
7.2.3 Landscaping and Lighting
Allowable landscaping shall not include fruit-bearing trees.
Lighting should be capped from above to help reduce night-sky light pollution, which inhibits nocturnal
wildlife behavior.
7.2.4 Fencing
Fencing shall be restricted so as not to limit terrestrial wildlife movements. Fencing approval will be under
the purview of the HOA. Residential fencing shall be limited to the building envelope. Fencing for
agricultural/livestock purposes shall be allowed. Any new fence constructed for agricultural or residential
purposes shall be built according to specifications provided in CPW’s Fencing With Wildlife in Mind.
7.2.5 Trails
Hiking and Biking trails shall be established with reference to best management practices in CPW’s
“Planning Trails with Wildlife in Mind.” BMPs include the following:
• To minimize impacts to wintering elk and deer, trails that are located within High Priority Habitats
will be subject to seasonal use restrictions as described in Section 7.2.6. HPH located in trail
alignments include elk and mule deer winter concentration areas.
• Trail density, with reference to the 5908-acre SVR will be 1.23 linear miles of hiking/MTB trail
per square mile within elk and mule deer winter concentration areas. This is greater than CPW’s
recommendation of less than 1 mi/sqmi; however, the seasonal closure provided in Section 7.2.6
will minimize the impact of these trails during winter and calving seasons, fostering consistency
with CPW’s trail recommendations.
• For the entire SVR, including within elk production range, dogs will be required to be leashed at
all times when outside of fenced enclosures.
• Unauthorized user trails that become established over time and are not intended as part of the
official SVR trail system shall be closed and rehabilitated.
7.2.6 Seasonal Access and Use Restrictions
Recognizing that the use of trails during certain times of the year can have adverse effects on wildlife, the
SVRMA shall develop and may revise, in consultation with CPW, a seasonal trail usage plan. The plan
shall restrict pedestrian, skier, biker, equestrian, and vehicle trail usage as appropriate to minimize
disturbance to wildlife during critical periods such as elk calving season (May 15 - June 30) and elk and
the mule deer winter concentration areas (December 1 - April 30). The plan shall apply to all areas of
Spring Valley Ranch except the Residential, Mixed Use, and Open Space Golf zone districts.
Both Wildlife Habitat Reserves will be seasonally closed to access each December 1 through April 30
(excepting the ski area portion) to provide security for elk during the winter and will also be closed to access
each May 15 through June 30 to provide secure habitat during elk calving season. Because the Emergency
Vehicle Access in the Northwestern Wildlife Habitat Reserve needs to remain accessible during the winter,
snow removal on this road will be allowed.
7.2.7 Garbage, Trash, Compost, Containers, BBQ Grills
All outdoor garbage shall be secured in Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee (IGBC) certified bear-resistant
canisters, if possible, or stored in a structure that prevents black bear access. No trash should be placed
outside in an unsecured manner, such as in bags or standard canisters. Any approved container containing
Spring Valley Ranch Wildlife Baseline Conditions & Mitigation Plan May 24, 2024
Page 19
such materials may be placed next to the street no earlier than 6:00 a.m. on the designated morning of
garbage collection and must be returned to its enclosed structure that same day. Compost piles are not
allowed. Compost structures and containers shall not be placed on a Lot. Barbeque grills shall be
maintained in a clean state to prevent attracting bears.
7.2.8 Pet Control Restrictions
Uncontrolled pets are a significant source of wildlife disturbance and mortality in human-occupied wildlife
habitats. Dogs have the ability to harass and kill wildlife, including big game, and domestic cats are a
significant source of mortality for songbirds. The potential negative impacts from this type of disturbance
(particularly from dogs) increases in severity in winter range and calving areas. It is during winter and
calving season that elk are most vulnerable to harassment. Thus, dogs and cats at Spring Valley Ranch will
be controlled by their owners and will not be allowed to roam free.
a) In order for a dog to be permitted on a Lot, the dog must either be kept indoors at all times or in a
fenced kennel, dog run, or invisible fence constructed within the Building Envelope on the Lot
pursuant to the prior written approval of the Design Review Committee. Dogs may never be kept
outdoors during the night unless such fenced enclosure is safe from predators. A permitted dog,
cat, or other household pet must be fenced or restrained at all times upon the Owner's or Occupant's
Lot, and shall not be permitted outside such Lot, except when on a leash not exceeding 12 feet in
length. The SVRMA shall have the right to designate specific areas within Spring Valley Ranch
where pets may be walked on leashes.
b) The Owner(s) of a Lot where a household pet is kept, as well as the legal owner of the pet (if not
such Owner) shall be jointly and severally liable for any and all damage and destruction caused by
the pet, and for any clean-up of the Owner's Lot, other Lots or property and streets and sidewalks
necessitated by such pet.
c) Pet food shall not be kept outdoors overnight.
d) Backyard poultry, waterfowl, beehives, and bird feeders are prohibited.
e) Horses may be kept on Lots where allowed under the PUD Guide, subject in each instance to such
rules, regulations and conditions as may be adopted from time to time by the SVRMA. All hay
storage must at a minimum be enclosed by an 8-foot mesh fence at the expense of the Lot Owner
which fencing must first be approved as to location and materials by the Design Review Committee.
7.2.9 Wildlife Damage
The Declarant, for itself and its successors and assigns, including but not limited to all Owners and
Occupants and the SVRMA, hereby waives and releases all claims against the State of Colorado, Parks &
Wildlife with regard to wildlife damage in Spring Valley Ranch.
7.2.10 Wildlife Feeding
The HOA shall prohibit wildlife feeding via salt blocks or other methods. Except for bird feeders, any type
of feeding, baiting, salting, or other means of attracting wildlife is illegal. CPW may cite both homeowners
and tenants for violations.
7.2.11 Golf Course and Open Space Management
An Open Space Management Plan shall be developed with wildlife habitat preservation and wildfire
management in mind as a primary management goal. Pursuant to that plan:
Spring Valley Ranch Wildlife Baseline Conditions & Mitigation Plan May 24, 2024
Page 20
a) All persons within the PUD are prohibited from chasing, scaring, frightening, disturbing or
otherwise harassing wildlife as a part of efforts to force wildlife off golf courses and open space
areas during the winter feeding and spring/summer production seasons. Harassment of Wildlife is
illegal pursuant to Colorado Revised Statute §33-6-128
b) The owner/operator of the golf course has the right to locally restrict wildlife from golf course tees,
greens, landscaping clumps and other sensitive areas by using temporary fencing and other passive
means. Any fencing erected will not restrict free movement of wildlife but will be used only in
small, isolated areas to help direct wildlife and/or people.
c) The Best Management Practices Plan for the golf course will be implemented to apply the proper
procedures for the application of fertilizers, herbicides, insecticides, and any other chemicals.
d) Disturbed ground caused by road construction will be reclaimed using native vegetation that is less
palatable to deer and elk.
7.2.12 Tree and Native Shrub Preservation
All Improvements within Spring Valley Ranch shall be located, designed, and constructed to preserve and
protect landmark trees to an extent reasonable and feasible under the circumstances. This restriction shall
not apply to the removal or trimming of dead or diseased vegetation, or to reasonable and necessary clearing
by an Owner in connection with the construction of improvements on a site previously approved by the
Design Review Committee. The Design Review Committee may approve the thinning of trees within view
corridors from the main house but shall not grant such approval in locations where a forest cover is essential
for screening from neighboring home sites or from key points along roads. Any violation of this Section
shall subject the offending Owner to such penalties, fines and/or other conditions as the Design Review
Committee considers appropriate, including without limitation the withdrawal or modification of previously
granted development approvals, or the requirement that replacement trees or shrubs of equivalent or
different size and type be planted and maintained by the Owner. The existing native vegetation shall be
preserved in all areas lying outside the platted Building Envelopes, except for such minimum disturbance
as may be required in connection with underground utilities, irrigation and drainage systems, and access
driveways and approved driveway features.
The restrictions set forth in this Section shall not apply to activities undertaken pursuant to the Wildfire
Mitigation Plan or to activities of the Wildlife Trust that may be performed from time to time by such Trust,
Owners or Occupants, the SVRMA, the District, or their respective successors or assigns.
7.2.13 Weed Control
The Owner or Occupant of each Lot within a residential zone district shall be responsible for maintaining
healthy vegetation free of infestations of noxious weeds. The SVRMA may inspect Lots periodically and
will notify the Owner and/or Occupant of any Lot with a noxious weed infestation that corrective actions
must be taken. If the Owner or Occupant does not correct the weed infestation within 10 days, the SVRMA
may contract for the corrective work to be performed by a third party. Any such third party shall have
access to the Lot to perform such work, and the Owner and Occupant shall hold such third party harmless
from any liability associated with such access and corrective work. All such work shall be at the expense
of the Owner of the Lot on which such work is performed, and the SVRMA shall have a lien on such Lot
for such expenses.
7.2.14 Residential Landscaped Areas
The use of native vegetation that is less palatable to deer and elk is encouraged within all residential
landscaped areas.
Spring Valley Ranch Wildlife Baseline Conditions & Mitigation Plan May 24, 2024
Page 21
7.2.15 Security Enforcement
The SVRMA shall employ a private security company within SVR; the security company shall be granted
the necessary authority to enforce the provisions and restrictions of the Covenants, including the
minimization measures included within this Wildlife Mitigation Plan.
7.3 MITIGATION
7.3.1 Designation of Wildlife Habitat Reserves
The Development Plan designates 806 acres of the preserved open space in the northwest portion of the
property and 514 acres of preserved open space in the southwest portion of the property as Wildlife Habitat
Reserves. The two reserves are located in Planning Areas A, B, G, & H.
7.3.1.1 Northern Habitat Reserve
The Northern Wildlife Habitat Reserve will be seasonally closed to access each December 1 through April
30 (excepting the ski area portion) to provide security for elk during the winter and will also be closed to
access each May 15 through June 30 to provide secure habitat during elk calving season. Because the
Emergency Vehicle Access in the Northwestern Wildlife Habitat Reserve needs to remain accessible during
the winter, snow removal on this road will be allowed.
7.3.1.2 Lower Valley Wildlife Habitat Reserve
The Lower Valley Wildlife Habitat Reserve (located in Planning Areas A and B) will be seasonally closed
to public access from December 1 through April 30 to provide security for elk during the winter and from
May 15 through June 30 to provide secure habitat during elk calving season. Additionally, the developer
will work with CPW to improve mountain shrub habitat that provides cover and forage for elk during the
winter and during calving.
7.3.2 Establishment of the Spring Valley Wildlife Real Estate Transfer Fee
7.3.2.1 Establishment
A Real Estate Transfer Fee of 2% shall be assessed on the net purchase price of all real estate sales
(including developer inventory, homes, and resales – but excluding affordable housing units) within the
Spring Valley Ranch PUD. Real Estate Transfer Fees will be paid by the seller; the obligation to pay the
Transfer Fee will be documented in the Master Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for
Spring Valley PUD. Two Rivers Community Foundation, a Garfield County-based non-profit (the “Two
Rivers”) will help coordinate and administer all funds collected from Transfer Fees. Western Colorado
Community Foundation (“WCCF”), an organization that manages charitable funds, endowments, provides
grants and scholarships and other resources for the benefit of the residents and communities of western
Colorado, will oversee Two Rivers. A portion of the Transfer Fee, 0.4%, shall be allocated to wildlife
projects in CPW's DAU E-16. Colorado Parks and Wildlife shall have sole control over how these funds
are to be allocated within the DAU.
7.3.2.2 Purpose and Use of Transfer Assessments
The funds received by the Spring Valley Wildlife Trust from the Transfer Fee shall be used for
the following categories of projects, or similar projects as CPW sees fit:
• Assist with the permanent conservation of wildlife habitat with comparable values to those found
on Spring Valley Ranch, as close to the Ranch as possible.
Spring Valley Ranch Wildlife Baseline Conditions & Mitigation Plan May 24, 2024
Page 22
• Fund habitat “uplift” projects.
• Fund wildlife research or wildlife management efforts that CPW sees value in.
• Funds shall be deployed at both the DAU & GMU levels.
8. AMENDMENT AND ENFORCEMENT
It is understood that this WMP will be recorded as part of the Master Declaration of Covenants, Conditions,
and Restrictions for the Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D., as amended. Furthermore, this WMP shall not be
amended without the written consent of Garfield County Board of County Commissioners. No amendment
shall require the approval of any owner except the Declarant. No Owner shall be deemed to be a third-
party beneficiary of this WMP, nor shall this WMP be enforceable by any Owner, except the Declarant. If
any conflict occurs between the SVRMA Documents and this WMP, the more restrictive provision shall
take precedent. This entire WMP, specifically those sections addressing Trail Seasonal Use Restrictions,
Garbage and Compost Containers, Pet Control Restrictions, and Weed Control l can be enforced by Spring
Valley Ranch and/or Garfield County. Homeowners and tenants shall be individually responsible for
abiding by all wildlife conflict mitigation measures adopted by Garfield County and the HOA.
9. ENDORSEMENT
By its execution of this document, CPW hereby agrees that the wildlife impacts associated with the
development of the Spring Valley Ranch PUD would be addressed were this plan to be implemented.
10. ASSIGNMENT
The Applicant/Declarant may, from time to time, assign its rights and obligations under this WMP by an
express assignment set forth in a recordable instrument to be recorded in the Garfield County records to
any person or entity acquiring an interest in the Spring Valley Ranch property. Such an assignment will be
deemed to have automatically occurred with any assignment of the Declarant's status under the Master
Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for the Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D. CPW and
Garfield County will be copied on any such assignments. From and after the date of such assignment, the
assignee(s) shall succeed to all obligations arising prior to and after the date of this WMP. Any assignee(s)
under this WMP may thereafter assign their rights and obligations under this WMP to other such
Spring Valley Ranch Wildlife Baseline Conditions & Mitigation Plan May 24, 2024
Page 23
assignee(s), subject to the terms and provisions herein by an express assignment set forth in an instrument
in recordable form and recorded in the Garfield County records.
11. SIGNATURE PAGE
For Storied Development LLC:
___________________________________________
Jeff Butterworth
Accepted and agreed to this ______ day of ______________, 2024.
For Colorado Division of Wildlife:
____________________________________________
Matt Yamashita, Area Wildlife Manager
Accepted and agreed to this ______ day of ______________, 2024.
Page 24
APPENDIX A
1. PUD Zone Districts
The Spring Valley Ranch PUD shall be comprised of nine Zone Districts that are intended to provide for
the comprehensive compatibility of allowed land uses and development standards. A Zoning Plan shall be
provided at the time of each subdivision Preliminary Plan application to Garfield County. The Zoning Plan
shall indicate the intended Zone District of each Lot or parcel of land subject to the subdivision Preliminary
Plan. Subsequently, at the time of each subdivision Final Plat filing, each Lot or parcel of land subject to
the Plat shall be assigned one of the following Zone Districts by the Developer consistent with the Zoning
Plan approved with the applicable subdivision Preliminary Plan. Zone Districts shall be clearly labeled or
indicated for each Lot or parcel shown on the Plat.
Dimensional building allowances and restrictions are defined for each Zone District in the Spring Valley
Ranch PUD Guide. Development of any lot, parcel or tract shall comply with the standards as identified in
the Zone District Dimensional Standards table (Table 1).
TABLE 1. Zone District Dimensional Standards
Zone District
Approx Lot
Size Range
Setbacks (feet) Max. Lot
Coverage
Ratio
Max.
Floor Area
Ratio
Max.
Building
Height
(feet) Front Rear Side
Pasture (P) ≥200 ac 50 50 10 2% 2% 35
Mountain (M) ≥5 ac 50 50 50 10% 15% 35
Ranch (R) 2-5 ac 30 30 30 20% 30% 35
Estate (E) 0.25-2 ac 25 25 25 35% 50% 35
Community Housing (CH)
Single Family DUs: 0.15-0.25 ac 20 10 10 50% 75% 25
2‐Unit & Attached DUs: 0.15-0.25 ac 20 10 10 50% 75% 25
Multi‐Unit DUs: ≥0.25 ac 20 20 20 50% 75% 35
Permitted Non‐DU uses: varies 20 20 20 20% 30% 35
Mixed Use (MU) 1-25 ac 10 10 10 35% 50% 40
Open Space Golf (OSG) varies 20 20 20 N/A N/A 25
Open Space Recreation (OSR) varies 20 20 20 N/A N/A 25
Open Space Limited (OSL) varies 75 75 75 N/A N/A N/A
Applying the Maximum Lot Coverage Ratio to the Number of Dwelling Units per Zone and the Zone
Density (in acres), we can calculate the total land area (360.3 acres) impacted by residential dwelling units
(Table 2).
The nine Zone Districts for the Spring Valley Ranch PUD are as follows:
Page 25
1.1. Pasture District (P)
The Pasture District is intended to allow for very low density rural residential uses, agricultural and
equestrian uses, natural resource areas, and associated accessory uses. The allowed uses of this Zone
District are intended to preserve the existing agrarian and natural resource characteristics of the area while
allowing for compatible residential, agricultural, equestrian, or accessory uses or structures.
1.2. Mountain District (M)
The Mountain District is intended to allow for low density single-family residential and accessory uses on
Lots that are approximately five (5) acres or larger. Accessory uses and Buildings are intended to relate to
the primary single-family residence, including but not limited to garages; storage Buildings for personal
property; workshops; art studios; and other similar accessory uses.
1.3. Ranch District (R)
The Ranch District is intended to allow for low density single-family residential and accessory uses on
Lots that are approximately two (2) to five (5) acres. Accessory uses and Buildings are intended to relate to
the primary single-family residence, including but not limited to garages; storage Buildings for personal
property; workshops; art studios; and other similar accessory uses.
1.4. Estate District (E)
The Estate District is intended to allow for low density single-family residential and accessory uses on Lots
that are approximately one-quarter (0.25) acre to two (2) acres. Accessory uses and Buildings are intended
to relate to the primary single-family residence, including but not limited to garages; storage Buildings for
personal property; workshops; art studios; and other similar accessory uses.
1.5. Community Housing District (CH)
The Community Housing District is intended to allow for medium density single-family, duplex and multi-
family residential units on Lots or parcels of varying sizes. This Zone District is planned to include
Community Housing Units in accordance with the Community Housing Program described in this PUD
Guide. This Zone District may also include additional non-deed restricted workforce housing units beyond
that required by the Community Housing Program (but subject to the overall maximum number of Dwelling
Units provided for in this PUD Guide).
1.6. Mixed Use District (MU)
The Mixed Use District is intended to allow a complementary range of commercial, residential, Community
Facility, and amenity-based land uses. This Zone District is meant to be geographically located in certain
areas of the PUD where central facilities and services are deemed most appropriate and accessible to a
broad number of users. The primary purpose of this Zone District is to provide the main community
amenities and services such as clubhouse/lodge; dining facilities; health and wellness facilities; event
spaces; convenience services; retail stores; parking; fire station; community offices; and metropolitan
district facilities.
1.7. Open Space Golf District (OSG)
The Open Space Golf District is intended to allow for one eighteen (18) hole golf course, one short golf
course, and one golf driving range and other practice facilities such as a putting green and practice chipping
area. This Zone District is also intended to allow for various supporting uses and structures such as cart
storage; comfort stations; concessions; parking; pathways and trails; ponds; and other customary accessory
uses and facilities.
Page 26
1.8. Open Space Recreation District (OSR)
The Open Space Recreation District is intended to allow for facilities and services related to supporting
active and passive recreation uses, such as trails; trailheads; sport courts; sport fields; fishing and boating;
Winter Recreation uses and facilities; parks; event facilities; community Buildings; interpretative facilities;
and other accessory uses or facilities.
1.9. Open Space Limited District (OSL)
The Open Space Limited District is intended to prioritize land preservation with minimal improvements or
uses. Lands within this Zone District may be adjacent to public lands outside of the PUD, providing
buffering to those public lands. Recreational uses within this Zone District are intended to be non-
mechanized and may include trails for non-mechanized recreation. Intermittent mechanized maintenance,
forestry and wildfire management activities will be allowed.
2. Overlay Areas
There are two types of Overlay Areas within the PUD, neither of which shall be considered Zone Districts
or Planning Areas. The purpose of the Overlay Areas is to provide for special management of certain lands
within the PUD as described below, and as shown on the PUD Plan Map.
2.1. Wildlife Habitat Reserves
The PUD shall include two (2) designated Wildlife Habitat Reserves consisting of a minimum of 1320 total
acres. These Wildlife Habitat Reserves are designated on the PUD Plan Map in Planning Areas A, B, G and
H.
Both Wildlife Habitat Reserves will be seasonally closed to access each December 1 through April 30
(excepting the ski area portion) to provide security for elk during the winter and will also be closed to access
each May 15 through June 30 to provide secure habitat during elk calving season. Because the Emergency
Vehicle Access in the Northwestern Wildlife Habitat Reserve needs to remain accessible during the winter,
snow removal on this road will be allowed. The developer will work with CPW to improve mountain shrub
habitat in the lower Wildlife Habitat Reserve that provides cover and forage for elk during the winter and
during calving.
2.2. Public Access Areas
The PUD shall include a minimum of four hundred and fifty hundred (450) acres of publicly accessible
Open Space, including a minimum of ten (10) miles of trails available for mountain biking and/or hiking,
and a public trailhead containing a minimum of twenty (20) parking spaces. Portions of the public access
areas will be subject to seasonal closures for the benefit of wildlife pursuant to Section 5.1 of this PUD
Guide. Public access areas shall be designated on the final plat at the time the land containing each public
access area is platted.
Page 27
TABLE 2. Total Lot Coverage by Zone DistrictA
Zone District Acres in
Zone
# of
Dwelling
Units
Zone
Density
(ac)
Percent
of PUD
Max Lot
Coverage
Ratio
Total
Coverage
per Lot
(ac)
Estimated
Total Lot
Coverage
by Zone
(ac)
Estimated
Percent of
Zone
District to
Remain
Undisturbed
Estimated
Zone
District
Acreage to
Remain
Undisturbed
Estimated
Total %
of Open
Space to
Remain
Pasture District 200 1 200.00 3.39% 2% 4.00 4.0 90% 180
Mountain District 800 106 8.50 13.54% 10% 0.85 90.1 75% 600
Ranch District 895 249 3.60 15.15% 20% 0.72 179.3 50% 448
Estate District 199 146 1.40 3.37% 35% 0.49 71.5 50% 100
Community Housing District 14 75 0.41 0.24% 50% 0.21 15.4 75% 11
Mixed Use District 49 0 0.83% 25% 12
Sub-Total Residential and MU 2157 577 36.51% 360.3
Open Space Golf District (OSG) 260 4.40% 33% 86
Open Space Recreation District (OSR) 2511 42.50% 95% 2385
Open Space Limited District (OSL) 743 12.58% 95% 706
Sub-Total Open Space 3514 59.48%
ROW 237 4.01% 5% 12
PUD Totals 5908 100.00% 4539 77%
A Note: The Acres in the Zone Districts displayed in the above table are estimated. Per Section 4 of the Spring Valley Ranch PUD Guide, Zone Districts shall be
assigned at the time of Preliminary Plan and Final Plat applications to Garfield County.